1
La început era Cuvântul, şi Cuvântul era cu Dumnezeu, şi Cuvântul era Dumnezeu.
2
El era la început cu Dumnezeu.
3
Toate lucrurile au fost făcute prin El; şi nimic din ce a fost făcut, n-a fost făcut fără El.
4
În El era viaţa, şi viaţa era lumina oamenilor.
5
Lumina luminează în întunerec, şi întunerecul n-a biruit-o.
6
A venit un om trimes de Dumnezeu: numele lui era Ioan.
7
El a venit ca martor, ca să mărturisească despre Lumină, pentruca toţi să creadă prin el.
8
Nu era el Lumina, ci el a venit ca să mărturisească despre Lumină.
9
Lumina aceasta era adevărata Lumină, care luminează pe orice om, venind în lume.
10
El era în lume, şi lumea a fost făcută prin El, dar lumea nu L-a cunoscut.
11
A venit la ai Săi, şi ai Săi nu L-au primit.
12
Dar tuturor celor ce L-au primit, adică celorce cred în Numele Lui, le-a dat dreptul să se facă copii ai lui Dumnezeu;
13
născuţi nu din sânge, nici din voia firii lor, nici din voia vreunui om, ci din Dumnezeu.
14
Şi Cuvântul S-a făcut trup, şi a locuit printre noi, plin de har, şi de adevăr. Şi noi am privit slava Lui, o slavă întocmai ca slava singurului născut din Tatăl. -
15
Ioan a mărturisit despre El, când a strigat: ,,El este Acela despre care ziceam eu: ,Celce vine după mine, este înaintea mea, pentrucă era înainte de mine`. -
16
Şi noi toţi am primit din plinătatea Lui, şi har după har;
17
căci Legea a fost dată prin Moise, dar harul şi adevărul au venit prin Isus Hristos.
18
Nimeni n-a văzut vreodată pe Dumnezeu; singurul Lui Fiu, care este în sânul Tatălui, Acela L-a făcut cunoscut.``
19
Iată mărturisirea făcută de Ioan, când Iudeii au trimes din Ierusalim pe nişte preoţi şi Leviţi să-l întrebe: ,,Tu cine eşti?``
20
El a mărturisit şi n-a tăgăduit: a mărturisit că nu este el Hristosul.
21
Şi ei l-au întrebat: ,,Dar cine eşti? Eşti Ilie?`` Şi el a zis: ,,Nu sânt!`` ,,Eşti proorocul?`` Şi el a răspuns: ,,Nu!``
22
Atunci i-au zis: ,,Dar cine eşti? Ca să dăm un răspuns celorce ne-au trimes. Ce zici tu despre tine însuţi?``
23
,,Eu``, a zis el, ,,sânt glasul celuice strigă în pustie: ,Neteziţi calea Domnului`, cum a zis proorocul Isaia.``
24
Trimeşii erau din partea Fariseilor.
25
Ei i-au mai pus următoarea întrebare: ,,Atunci de ce botezi, dacă nu eşti Hristosul, nici Ilie, nici proorocul?``
26
Drept răspuns, Ioan le-a zis: ,,Eu botez cu apă; dar în mijlocul vostru stă Unul, pe care voi nu -L cunoaşteţi.
27
El este Acela care vine după mine, -şi care este înaintea mea; eu nu sânt vrednic să -I desleg cureaua încălţămintelor Lui.``
28
Aceste lucruri s-au petrecut în Betabara (Sau: Betania.), dincolo de Iordan, unde boteza Ioan.
29
A doua zi, Ioan a văzut pe Isus venind la el, şi a zis: ,,Iată Mielul lui Dumnezeu, care ridică păcatul lumii!
30
El este Acela despre care ziceam: ,,După mine vine un om, care este înaintea mea, căci era înainte de mine.
31
Eu nu -L cunoşteam, dar tocmai pentru aceasta am venit să botez cu apă: ca El să fie făcut cunoscut lui Israel.``
32
Ioan a făcut următoarea mărturisire: ,,Am văzut Duhul pogorându-Se din cer ca un porumbel şi oprindu-Se peste El.
33
Eu nu -L cunoşteam; dar Celce m-a trimes să botez cu apă, mi-a zis: ,Acela peste care vei vedea Duhul pogorându-Se şi oprindu-Se, este Celce botează cu Duhul Sfânt.`
34
Şi eu am văzut lucrul acesta, şi am mărturisit că El este Fiul lui Dumnezeu.``
35
A doua zi, Ioan stătea iarăş cu doi din ucenicii lui.
36
Şi, pe când privea pe Isus umblând, a zis: ,,Iată Mielul lui Dumnezeu!``
37
Cei doi ucenici l-au auzit rostind aceste vorbe, şi au mers după Isus.
38
Isus S-a întors; şi, când i-a văzut că merg după El, le-a zis: ,,Ce căutaţi?`` Ei I-au răspuns: ,,Rabi (care, tâlmăcit, însemnează: ,,Învăţătorule), unde locuieşti?``
39
,,Veniţi de vedeţi``, le-a zis El. S-au dus şi au văzut unde locuia; şi în ziua aceea au rămas la El. Era cam pela ceasul al zecelea.
40
Unul din cei doi, cari auziseră cuvintele lui Ioan şi merseseră după Isus, era Andrei, fratele lui Simon Petru.
41
El, cel dintâi, a găsit pe fratele său Simon, şi i-a zis: ,,Noi am găsit pe Mesia`` (care, tâlmăcit însemnează Hristos).
42
Şi l-a adus la Isus. Isus l-a privit, şi i-a zis: ,,Tu eşti Simon, fiul lui Iona; tu te vei chema Chifa``, (care, tâlmăcit, însemnează Petru).
43
A doua zi Isus a vrut să Se ducă în Galilea, şi a găsit pe Filip. Şi i-a zis: ,,Vino după Mine.``
44
Filip era din Betsaida, cetatea lui Andrei şi a lui Petru.
45
Filip a găsit pe Natanael, şi i-a zis: ,,Noi am găsit pe Acela, despre care a scris Moise în lege, şi proorocii: pe Isus din Nazaret, fiul lui Iosif.
46
Natanael i-a zis: ,,Poate ieşi ceva bun din Nazaret?`` ,,Vino şi vezi!`` i-a răspuns Filip.
47
Isus a văzut pe Natanael venind la El, şi a zis despre el: ,,Iată cu adevărat un Israelit, în care nu este vicleşug.``
48
,,De unde mă cunoşti?`` I-a zis Natanael. Drept răspuns Isus i-a zis: ,,Te-am văzut mai înainte ca să te chieme Filip, când erai supt smochin.``
49
Natanael I-a răspuns: ,,Rabi, Tu eşti Fiul lui Dumnezeu, Tu eşti Împăratul lui Israel!``
50
Drept răspuns, Isus i-a zis: ,,Pentrucă ţi-am spus că te-am văzut supt smochin, crezi? Lucruri mai mari decât acestea vei vedea.``
51
Apoi i-a zis: ,,Adevărat, adevărat vă spun, că, deacum încolo, veţi vedea cerul deschis şi pe îngerii lui Dumnezeu suindu-se şi pogorându-se peste Fiul omului.``
{"verseMap":{"1":[{"id":4751,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"and Text of the (New Testament) Bible*, Manuscripts","title_en":"and Text of the (New Testament) Bible*, Manuscripts","content_ro":"<h3>BIBLE*, M<span>anuscripts and Text of the (New Testament)<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Copies of the NT books produced by scribes and editions made from these copies. In the centuries prior to the simultaneous-multiple production of copies via dictation (wherein many scribes in a scriptorium transcribed a text dictated to them by one reader), all manuscript copies were made singly—each scribe producing a copy from an exemplar.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the 15th century, when Johannes Gutenberg invented movable type for the printing press, all copies of any work of literature were made by hand (hence, the name “manuscript”). According to a current tabulation, there are 99 papyrus manuscripts, 257 uncial manuscripts, and 2,795 minuscule manuscripts. We can add 2,209 Greek lectionaries to this list. Therefore, we have over 5,350 manuscript copies of the Greek NT or portions thereof. No other work of Greek literature can boast of such numbers.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Important Papyrus Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>• Important Uncial Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>• The Text of the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ImportantPapyrusManuscripts\">Important Papyrus Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>Papyrus is a tall, aquatic reed, the pith of which is cut into strips, laid in a crosswork pattern and glued together to make a page for writing. The papyrus rolls of Egypt have been used as a writing surface since the early third millennium <span>BC<\/span>. The Greeks adopted papyrus around 900 <span>BC<\/span>, and later the Romans adopted its use. However, the oldest extant Greek rolls of papyrus date from the fourth century <span>BC<\/span>. Unfortunately, papyrus is perishable, requiring a dry climate for its preservation. That is why so many papyri have been discovered in the desert sands of Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>The NT papyrus manuscripts (abbreviated as “P”) are generally the earliest manuscripts of the NT. Broadly speaking, the most important ones can be categorized in three groups: the Oxyrhynchus Papyri (from Oxyrhynchus, Egypt), (2) the Beatty Papyri (named after the owner); and (3) the Bodmer Papyri (named after the owner).<\/p>\n<h5>The Oxyrhynchus Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>Beginning in 1898 B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt discovered thousands of papyrus fragments in the ancient rubbish heaps of Oxyrhynchus, Egypt. This site yielded volumes of papyrus fragments containing all sorts of written material (literature, business and legal contracts, letters, etc.) as well as over 40 manuscripts containing portions of the NT. Some of the more noteworthy papyrus manuscripts from Oxyrhynchus are as follows:<\/p>\n<h6>P1 (P. Oxy. 2)<\/h6>\n<p>This late second-century manuscript contains Matthew 1:1-9, 12, 14-20. Grenfell and Hunt in the winter of 1896–97 went to Oxyrhynchus (now called El Bahnasa) in search of ancient Christian documents. P1 was discovered on the second day of the dig. At the time of this discovery, this was the earliest extant copy of any NT portion—at least 100 years earlier than Codex Vaticanus. The copyist of P1 seems to have faithfully followed a very reliable exemplar. Where there are major variants, P1 agrees with the best Alexandrian witnesses, especially B (Codex Vaticanus), from which it rarely varies.<\/p>\n<h6>P5 (P. Oxy. 208 and 1781)<\/h6>\n<p>Two separate portions of this third-century manuscript were unearthed from Oxyrhynchus by Grenfell and Hunt, both from the same papyrus manuscript. The first portion contains John 1:23-31, 33-40 on one fragment and John 20:11-17 on another—probably on the first and last quires of a manuscript containing only the Gospel of John. This portion was published in volume II of <em>Oxyrhynchus Papyri<\/em> in 1899; the second portion—containing John 16:14-30—was not published until 1922 in volume XV of <em>Oxyrhynchus Papyri.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>After examining the first portion, Grenfell and Hunt said, “The text is a good one, and appears to have affinities with that of Codex Sinaiticus, with which the papyrus agrees in several readings not found elsewhere.” The papyrus, written in a documentary hand, is marked for its brevity.<\/p>\n<h6>P13 (P. Oxy. 657 and PSI 1292)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated between 175 and 225, contains 12 columns from a roll preserving the text of Hebrews 2:14–5:5; 10:8-22; 10:29–11:13; 11:28–12:7. The text of Hebrews was written in a reformed documentary hand on the back of the papyrus containing the new epitome of Livy. For this reason, some scholars think the manuscript was possibly brought to Egpyt by a Roman official and left behind when he left his post. P13 very often agrees with B, and it supplements B where it is lacking—namely, from Hebrews 9:14 to the end of Hebrews. P13 and P46 display nearly the same text. Out of a total of 88 variation-units, there are 71 agreements and only 17 disagreements.<\/p>\n<h6>P77 (P. Oxy. 2683 + 4405)<\/h6>\n<p>Dated c. 150–75, this is the earliest manuscript of Matthew (23:30-39). The manuscript is clearly a literary production. It was written in an elegant hand and has what was or became a standard system of chapter division, as well as punctuation and breathing marks. P77 has close textual affinities with Codex Sinaiticus.<\/p>\n<h6>P90 (P. Oxy. 3523)<\/h6>\n<p>This second-century manuscript (c. 150–75) contains John 18:36–19:7. The handwriting (an upright, rounded, elegant script) is much like that found in P66. Furthermore, P90 has more affinity with P66 than with any other single manuscript, though it does not concur with P66 in its entirety.<\/p>\n\n<h6>P. Oxy. 4404<\/h6>\n<p>Containing Matthew 21:34-37, 43, 45, this manuscript could be the earliest extant manuscript of the NT in that the script is early Roman and therefore could be dated to the early second century.<\/p>\n<h5>The Chester Beatty Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>These manuscripts were purchased from a dealer in Egypt during the 1930s by Chester Beatty and by the University of Michigan. The three manuscripts in this collection are very early and contain a large portion of the NT text. P45 (c. 200) contains portions of all four Gospels and Acts; P46 (c. 125) has almost all of Paul’s epistles and Hebrews; and P47 (third century) contains Revelation 9–17.<\/p>\n<h6>P45 (Chester Beatty Papyrus I)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex has the four Gospels and Acts (Mt 20:24-32; 21:13-19; 25:41–26:39; Mk 4:36–9:31; 11:27–12:28; Lk 6:31–7:7; 9:26–14:33; Jn 4:51–5:2, 21-25; 10:7-25; 10:30–11:10, 18-36, 42-57; Acts 4:27–17:17). The order of books in the original intact manuscript was probably as follows: Matthew, John, Luke, Mark, Acts (the so-called Western order). This manuscript was dated by Kenyon to the early third century, a date that was confirmed by the papyrologists W. Schubart and H. I. Bell. This continues to be the date assigned to this manuscript in modern handbooks on textual criticism and critical editions of the Greek NT, but the consistent formation of certain letters suggests an earlier date—maybe sometime in the late second century.<\/p>\n<p>The scribe of P45 worked without any intention of exactly reproducing his source. He wrote with a great amount of freedom—harmonizing, smoothing out, substituting at will. In short, the scribe did not actually copy words. He saw through the language to its idea-content, and copied that in words of his own choosing, or in rearranged order. Thus, in the scribe of P45 we see an exegete and a paraphraser.<\/p>\n<h6>P46 (Chester Beatty Papyrus II)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex has most of Paul’s epistles (excluding the Pastorals) in this order: Romans 5:17–6:14; 8:15–15:9; 15:11–16:27; Hebrews 1:1–13:25; 1 Corinthians 1:1–16:22; 2 Corinthians 1:1–13:13; Ephesians 1:1–6:24; Galatians 1:1–6:18; Philippians 1:1–4:23; Colossians 1:1–4:18; 1 Thessalonians 1:1; 1:9–2:3; 5:5-9, 23-28 (with minor lacunae in each of the books).<\/p>\n<p>The manuscript was originally dated to the early third century. But others, since, have dated the manuscript earlier in the second century. The scribe who produced this manuscript used an early, excellent exemplar. He was a professional scribe because there are stichoi notations at the end of several books (see the conclusion of Romans, 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, Philippians). The stichoi were used by professionals to note how many lines had been copied for commensurate pay. Most likely, the ex officio of the scriptorium (perhaps connected with a church library) paginated the codex and indicated the stichoi. The scribe himself made a few corrections as he went, and then several other readers made corrections here and there.<\/p>\n<p>The text of P46 shows a strong affinity with B (especially in Ephesians, Colossians, and Hebrews) and next with א (Codex Sinaiticus). P46 agrees much less with the later representatives of the Alexandrian text. In short, P46 is proto-Alexandrian. In Hebrews, P46 and P13 display nearly the same text. Out of a total of 88 variation-units, there are 71 agreements and only 17 disagreements.<\/p>\n<h6>P47 (Chester Beatty Papyrus III)<\/h6>\n<p>This third-century codex contains Revelation 9:10–17:2. The text of P47 agrees more often with that of Codex Sinaiticus than with any other manuscript (including Codex Alexandrinus and Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus), though it often shows independence.<\/p>\n<h5>The Bodmer Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>These manuscripts were purchased by M. Martin Bodmer from a dealer in Egypt during the 1950s and 1960s. The three important papyri in this collection are P66 (c. 175, containing almost all of John), P72 (third century, having all of 1 and 2 Peter and Jude), and P75 (c. 200, containing large parts of Luke 3—John 15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h4\" id=\"P66\">P66 (Papyrus Bodmer II)<\/p>\n<p>This manuscript contains most of John’s Gospel (1:1–6:11; 6:35–14:26, 29-30; 15:2-26; 16:2-4, 6-7; 16:10–20:20, 22-23; 20:25–21:9). The manuscript does not include the pericope of the adulteress (7:53–8:11), making it the earliest witness to not include this spurious passage. The manuscript is usually dated as c. 200, but the renowned paleographer Herbert Hunger has argued that P66 should be dated to the first half, if not the first quarter, of the second century.<\/p>\n<p>According to recent studies, it seems evident that P66 has preserved the work of three individuals: the original scribe, a thoroughgoing corrector, and a minor corrector. With a practiced calligraphic hand, the original scribe of P66 wrote in larger print as he went along in order to fill out the codex. The large print throughout indicates that it was written to be read aloud to a Christian congregation. The text exhibits the scribe’s knowledge of other portions of Scripture (inasmuch as he harmonized John 6:69 to Matthew 16:16 and John 21:6 to Luke 5:5), his use of standard <em>nomina sacra<\/em> (a way of writing divine names), and his special use of <em>nomina sacra<\/em> for the words “cross” and “crucify.”<\/p>\n<p>The original scribe was quite free in his interaction with the text; he produced several singular readings that reveal his independent interpretation of the text. While the numerous scribal mistakes would seem to indicate that the scribe was inattentive, many of the singular readings—prior to correction—reveal that he was not detached from the narrative of the text. Rather, he became so absorbed in his reading that he often forgot the exact words he was copying. His task as a copyist was to duplicate the exemplar word for word, but this was frustrated by the fact that he was reading the text in logical semantic chunks and often became a coproducer of a new text. As a result, he continually had to stop his reading and make many in-process corrections. But he left several places uncorrected, which were later fixed by the <em>diorthotes<\/em> (official corrector). The finished product is quite good, presenting a text that is very close to the Alexandrian witnesses.<\/p>\n<h6>P72 (Papyrus Bodmer VII–VIII)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated late third century, has an interesting collection of writings in one codex: 1 Peter 1:1–5:14; 2 Peter 1:1–3:18; Jude 1:1-25; the Nativity of Mary, the apocryphal correspondence of Paul to the Corinthians, the eleventh ode of Solomon, Melito’s Homily on the Passover, a fragment of a hymn, the Apology of Phileas, and Psalms 33 and 34.<\/p>\n<p>Scholars think that four scribes took part in producing the entire manuscript. First Peter has clear Alexandrian affinities—especially with B. Second Peter and (especially) Jude display more of an uncontrolled type text (usually associated with the “Western” text), with several independent readings.<\/p>\n<h6>P75 (Papyrus Bodmer XIV–XV)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex contains most of Luke and John (Lk 3:18–4:2; 4:34–5:10; 5:37–18:18; 22:4–24:53; Jn 1:1–11:45, 48-57; 12:3–13:1, 8-9; 14:8-30; 15:7-8.) The manuscript does not include the pericope of the adulteress (7:53–8:11). The manuscript can be dated to the late second or early third century.<\/p>\n<p>The copyist of P75 was a literate scribe trained in making books. His craftsmanship shows through in his tight calligraphy and controlled copying. The handwriting displayed in this manuscript is typically called by paleographers the common angular type of the late second to early third century. The scribe’s Christianity shows in his abbreviations of the <em>nomina sacra<\/em><em>,<\/em> as well as in his abbreviation of the word “cross.” These are telltale signs of a scribe who belonged to the Christian community. Furthermore, the large typeface indicates that the manuscript was composed to be read aloud to a Christian congregation. The scribe even added a system of sectional divisions to aid any would-be lector. Thus, we have a manuscript written by a Christian for other Christians.<\/p>\n<p>There are several indications of the scribe’s Alexandrian orientation. First and foremost is his scriptoral acumen. He is the best of all the early Christian scribes, and his manuscript is an extremely accurate copy. P75 is the work of an extremely disciplined scribe who copied with the intention of being careful and accurate. Scholars generally agree that P75 displays the kind of text that was used in making Codex Vaticanus (there is 87 percent agreement between P75 and B). As such, textual scholars have a high regard for P75’s textual fidelity.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Other Papyrus Manuscripts<\/h5>\n<h6>P4 + P64 + P67<\/h6>\n<p>These three papyrus manuscripts are part of one codex dated <span>AD<\/span> 150–175. The manuscript was the work of a professional scribe, and the text is extremely accurate.<\/p>\n<h6>P32 (Rylands Papyrus 5)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, preserving Titus 1:11-15; 2:3-8, is dated c. 175, making it the earliest extant copy of any of the Pastoral Epistles. P32 shows agreement with א and with F and G. Since F and G (nearly identical manuscripts) go back to the same archetype, it is possible that P32 could be linked to the same source.<\/p>\n<h6>P52 (Rylands Papyrus 457)<\/h6>\n<p>This fragment, containing John 18:31-34, 37-38, is noteworthy because of its date: c. 110–125. Many scholars (F. Kenyon, H. I. Bell, A. Deissmann, and W. H. P. Hatch) have confirmed this dating. The manuscript came from the Fayum or Oxyrhynchus site. It was acquired in 1920 by Grenfell, but it remained unnoticed among hundreds of papyri until 1934, when C. H. Roberts recognized that this fragment preserves a few verses from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ImportantUncialManuscripts\">Important Uncial Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>The manuscripts typically classified as “uncial” are so designated to differentiate them from papyrus manuscripts. In a sense, this is a misnomer because the real difference has to do with the material they are written on—vellum (treated animal hide) as compared to papyrus—not the kind of letters used. Indeed, the papyri are also written in uncials (capital letters), but the term “uncial” typically describes the majuscule lettering that was prominent in fourth-century biblical texts, such as in א, A, B, C.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Sinaiticus (or א)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex contains the entire OT and the NT in this order: the four Gospels, the Pauline Epistles (including Hebrews), Acts, the General Epistles, Revelation. It also includes the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas. The codex cannot be earlier than 340 (the year Eusebius died) because the Eusebian sections of the text are indicated in the margins of the Gospels by a contemporary hand. Most scholars date it 350–375.<\/p>\n<p>This codex was discovered by Constantin von Tischendorf in St Catherine’s Monastery (situated at the foot of Mt Sinai). On a visit to the monastery in 1844 he noticed in a wastebasket some parchment leaves that were being used to light the lamps. He was allowed to take this waste paper, which proved to be 43 leaves from various parts of the Greek translation of the OT.<\/p>\n<p>In 1853 he made a second trip to the monastery and found nothing. In 1859, however, on his third trip, he found not only other parts of the OT but also the complete NT. He was finally able to persuade the monastery authorities to present the manuscript to the czar, the great patron of the Greek Catholic Church, who placed it in the Imperial Library in St Petersburg. The czar gave great honors to the monastery and its authorities, and everybody seemed well pleased. Later Tischendorf was charged with having stolen the manuscript from its lawful owners, but the better textual scholars do not accept that story.<\/p>\n\n<p>The manuscript remained in the Imperial Library until 1933, when it was purchased by the British Museum for the huge sum of £100,000 (about $500,000). Textual criticism made the headlines because one manuscript was bought for this much money, raised largely by public subscription during the Great Depression. The manuscript is now on display in the manuscript room of the museum, where it is considered one of its most prized possessions.<\/p>\n<p>The text of Sinaiticus is very closely related to that of Codex Vaticanus. They agree in presenting the purest type of text, usually called the Alexandrian text type. Tischendorf greatly used the textual evidence of Codex Sinaiticus in preparing his critical editions of the Greek NT. Tischendorf thought four scribes had originally produced the codex, whom he named scribes A, B, C, D. After reinvestigation, H. J. Milne and T. C. Skeat identified only three scribes: A (who wrote the historical and poetical books of the OT, as well as most of the NT), B (who wrote the Prophets and the Shepherd of Hermas), and D (who wrote some Psalms, Tobit, Judith, and 4 Maccabees, and redid small sections of the NT). Milne and Skeat demonstrated that scribe A of Codex Vaticanus was likely the same scribe as scribe D of Codex Sinaiticus. If this true, then א is contemporary with B—perhaps produced in the same scriptorium in Alexandria. Codex Sinaiticus provides a fairly reliable witness to the NT; however, the scribe was not as careful as the scribe of B.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Alexandrinus (A)<\/h5>\n<p>This is one of the three most important codices containing early copies of the whole Bible in Greek (the other two being the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus codexes). The name Alexandrinus comes from ancient records suggesting that it was copied in Egypt during the early part of the fifth century <span>AD<\/span>. The early history of this manuscript and its Egyptian provenance is partially revealed by its flyleaves. A note by Cyril of Lucar (patriarch of Alexandria and then of Constantinople in the 1620s) states that, according to tradition, it was written by Thecla, a noble lady of Egypt shortly after the Council of Nicaea (325) and that her name was originally inscribed at the end of the volume but the last page was lost due to mutilation. An Arabic note of the 13th or 14th century also says that the manuscript was written by “Thecla the martyr.” Another Arabic note says that is was presented to the patriarchal cell of Alexandria (c. 1098). Cyril of Lucar took the manuscript from Alexandria to Constantinople in 1621 and then gave it to Charles I of England in 1627, where it became part of the Royal Library, then later the British Museum.<\/p>\n<p>Only 773 of the original 820 or so pages still exist. The rest were lost as the book was passed down through the centuries. The surviving parts of Alexandrinus contain a Greek translation of the whole OT, the Apocrypha (including four books of Maccabees and Psalm 151), most of the NT, and some early Christian writings (of which the First and Second Epistles of Clement to the Corinthians are the most important).<\/p>\n<p>Frederick Kenyon thought the codex was the work of five scribes, to each of whom he designated a Roman numeral. According to Kenyon, scribes I and II copied the OT; scribe III did Matthew, Mark, 1 Corinthians 10:8—Philemon 1:25; scribe IV did Luke—Acts, General Epistles, Romans 1:1—1 Corinthians 10:8; and scribe V did Revelation. Milne and Skeat, however, argued that the whole codex was the work of two copyists (I and II). W. H. P. Hatch noted that many corrections have been made in the manuscript, most of them at an early date. Some of these corrections were introduced by the scribe himself, and others came from later hands.<\/p>\n<p>Evidently, the scribes of this codex used exemplars of varying quality for various sections of the NT. The exemplar used for the Gospels was of poor quality, reflecting a Byzantine text type. Its testimony in the Epistles is much better, and in Revelation it provides the best witness to the original text.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Codex Vaticanus (B)<\/h5>\n<p>Codex Vaticanus is the Vatican Manuscript, so named because it is the most famous manuscript in the Vatican Library in Rome. This manuscript has been in the Vatican’s library since at least 1475, but it was not made available to scholars, such as Constantin von Tischendorf and Samuel Tregelles, until the middle of the 19th century.<\/p>\n<p>At one time, the codex contained the whole Greek Bible, including most of the books of the Apocrypha, but it has lost many of its leaves. Originally it must have had about 820 leaves (1,640 pp), but now it has 759—617 in the OT and 142 in the NT. The major gaps of the manuscript are Genesis 1:1–46:28; 2 Samuel 2:5-7, 10-13; Psalms 106:27–138:6; Hebrews 9:14–13:25; the Pastoral Epistles; and Revelation. Each leaf measures ten and a half by ten inches (26.7 by 25.4 centimeters). Each page has three columns (two for the poetical books) with 40 to 44 lines to the column. The manuscript was written by two different scribes. It is dated in the early to middle part of the fourth century. It is not known where the manuscript originated, but it has been in the Vatican Library from the time of its earliest catalog in 1475.<\/p>\n\n<p>When Napoleon conquered Rome, he brought its treasures to Paris, including this manuscript. The scholar Hug identified it and called the attention of other scholars to it. After the downfall of Napoleon, the manuscript was returned to the Vatican Library. Competent textual scholars were not allowed to do careful work on it until a photographic edition was published in 1890. It is now on exhibit in the Vatican Library.<\/p>\n<p>The text of the Vatican Manuscript is much like that of Codex Sinaiticus. These are generally recognized as the two finest examples of the Alexandrian type of Greek text of the NT. The Greek text of the OT is very fine too, but it is not quite so important, as the original language of the OT was Hebrew. Virtually all the textual scholars since the days of Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort (who brought out their Greek Testament, including their theory of textual criticism, in 1881), recognize this neutral type of text as a very early text and a very pure text, an extremely accurate reproduction of what the original text must have been. Westcott and Hort called it a second-century text accurate in 999 out of 1,000 words so far as any matter of translatable difference was concerned. א and B are the finest examples of this type of text, but it is also found in a few other Greek uncial manuscripts, a few of the early translations, and in the writings of a few of the early church fathers. Since the days of Westcott and Hort, their theory has been confirmed by the discovery of some papyrus manuscripts, notably the Bodmer Papyri, discovered in the 1950s.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus (C)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex is a palimpsest (the original writing was erased and different words written on the same material). It originally contained the entire Bible but now has only parts of six OT books and portions of all NT books except 2 Thessalonians and 2 John. The single-column Bible text, written in the 5th century <span>AD<\/span>, was erased in the 12th century and replaced by a two-column text of a Greek translation of sermons or treatises by a certain Ephraem, a 4th-century Syrian church leader. Such a practice was common in periods of economic depression or when parchment was scarce. The original writing was scraped from the writing surface and the surface smoothed. Then new compositions could be written on the prepared surface. Using chemicals Tischendorf was able to read much of the erased document.<\/p>\n<p>The manuscript may have been brought from the east to Florence by a learned Greek named Andrew John Lascar in the time of Lorenzo de’Medici. Since Lascar was known as Rhyndacenus (from the river Rhyndacus), he probably came from the region of Phrygia (site of ancient Laodicea). Where the manuscript was prior to this is not known. The Ephraemi manuscript was brought to Italy in the early sixth century, where it became the property of the Medici family. Catherine de’Medici took it to France, where it remains today.<\/p>\n<p>The text of this manuscript is mixed—it is compounded from all the major text types, agreeing frequently with the later koine of Byzantine type, which most scholars regard as the least valuable type of NT text.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Bezae (D)<\/h5>\n<p>This is a Greek-Latin diglot containing Matthew—Acts, 3 John, with lacunae. Most scholars date it late fourth or early fifth century (c. 400). Some scholars think the codex was produced in either Egypt or North Africa by a scribe whose mother tongue was Latin. Another scholar (D. C. Parker) has argued that it was copied in Beirut, a center of Latin legal studies during the fifth century, where both Latin and Greek were used. Evidently, it was produced by a scribe who knew Latin better than Greek, and then was corrected by several scribes. In any event, the codex somehow came into the hands of Theodore Beza, French scholar and successor to Calvin. Beza gave it to the Cambridge University Library in 1581.<\/p>\n<p>This codex is probably the most controversial of the NT uncials because of its marked independence. Its many additions, omissions, and alterations (especially in Luke and Acts) are the work of a significant theologian. A few earlier manuscripts (P29, P38, P48, and 0171) appear to be precursors to the type of text found in D, which is considered the principal witness of the Western text-type. Thus, Codex Bezae could be a copy of an earlier revised edition. This reviser must have been a scholar who had a propensity for adding historical, biographical, and geographical details. More than anything, he was intent on filling in gaps in the narrative by adding circumstantial details.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Washingtonianus, or The Freer Gospels (W)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex, dated around 400, has the four Gospels and Acts. It is often referred to as the Freer Gospels—named after its owner, Charles Freer. The codex likely came from the ruins of a monastery near Giza. The handwriting is quite similar to that found in a fifth-century fragment of the book of Enoch found at Akhmim in 1886.<\/p>\n<p>Codex W was copied from a parent manuscript (exemplar) that had been pieced together from several different manuscripts. This is obvious because the textual presentation of W is noticeably variegated and even the stratification of the text is matched by similar variations in paragraphing. The scribe who collated the parent manuscript drew upon various sources to put together his Gospel codex. It is likely that the scribe of the parent manuscript used a text that came from North Africa (the “Western” text) for the first part of Mark, and the scribe of W used manuscripts from Antioch for Matthew and the second part of Luke to fill the gaps in the more ancient manuscript he was copying. Detailed textual analysis reveals the variegated textual stratifications of W, as follows: in Matthew the text is Byzantine; in Mark the text is first Western (1:1–5:30), then Caesarean in Mark 5:31–16:20 (akin to P45); in Luke the text is first Alexandrian (1:1–8:12), then Byzantine. John is more complicated because the first part of John (1:1–5:11), which fills a quire, was the work of a seventh-century scribe who must have replaced a damaged quire. (W<span>s<\/span> designates the work of this scribe.) This first section has a mixture of Alexandrian and Western readings, as does the rest of John.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex 1739<\/h5>\n<p>This tenth-century codex has Acts and the Epistles. The manuscript was discovered at Mt Athos in 1879 by E. von der Goltz. The manuscript has strong textual affinities with P46, B, 1739, Coptic Sahidic, Coptic Boharic, Clement, and Origen. The relationship between P46, B, and 1739 is remarkable because 1739 is a tenth-century manuscript that was copied from a fourth-century manuscript of excellent quality. According to a colophon, the scribe of 1739 for the Pauline Epistles followed a manuscript that came from Caesarea in the library of Pamphilus and that contained an Origenian text. The three manuscripts, P46, B, and 1739, form a clear textual line: from P46 (early second century) to B (early fourth century) to 1739 (tenth century based on fourth century).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTextoftheNewTestament\">The Text of the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The original text of the NT is the “published” text—that is, the text as it was in its final edited form and released for circulation in the Christian community. For some books of the NT, there is little difference between the original composition and the published text. After the author wrote or dictated his work, he (or an associate) made the final editorial corrections and then released it for distribution. As is the case for books published in modern times, so in ancient times, the original writing of the author is not always the same as what is published—due to the editorial process. Nonetheless, the author is credited with the final edited text, and the published book is attributed to the author and considered the autograph. This autograph is the original published text. Of course, in this case the autographs do not exist, so scholars have to rely on copies to recover or reconstruct the original wording.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars think it is impossible to recover the original text of the Greek NT because they have not been able to reconstruct the early history of textual transmission. Other modern scholars are less pessimistic but still quite guarded in affirming the possiblity. And yet others are optimistic because we possess many early manuscripts of excellent quality and because our view of the early period of textual transmission has been getting clearer and clearer.<\/p>\n<p>When we speak of recovering the text of the NT, we are referring to individual books of the NT, not to the entire volume per se, because each book (or group of books—such as the Pauline Epistles) had its own unique history of textual transmission. The earliest extant copy of an entire NT text is the one preserved in Codex Sinaiticus (written about <span>AD<\/span> 375). (Codex Vaticanus lacks the Pastoral Epistles and Revelation.) Prior to the fourth century, the NT was circulated in its various parts: as a single book or a group of books (such as the four Gospels or the Pauline Epistles). Manuscripts from the late first century to the third century have been found with individual books such as Matthew (P1, P77), Mark (P88), Luke (P69), John (P5, 22, 52, 66), Acts (P91), Revelation (P18, 47), or containing groups of books, such as the four Gospels with Acts (P45), the Pauline Epistles (P30, P46, P92), the Petrine Epistles and Jude (P72). Each of the books of the NT has had its own textual history and has been preserved with varying degrees of accuracy. Nonetheless, all of the books were altered from the original state due to the process of manual copying decade after decade and century after century. And the text of each of the books needs to be recovered.<\/p>\n<p>The NT text was affected with many variations in its early history. In the late first and early second century, the oral traditions and the written word existed side by side with equal status—especially with respect to the material of the Gospels. Often, the text was changed by scribes attempting to conform the written message to the oral tradition or attempting to conform one Gospel account to another. By the end of the second century and into the third century, many of the significant variant readings entered into the textual stream.<\/p>\n<p>The early period of textual transmission, however, was not completely marred by textual infidelity and scribal liberty. There were those scribes who copied the text faithfully and reverently—that is, they recognized that they were copying a sacred text written by an apostle. The formalization of canonization did not ascribe this sacredness to the text. Canonization came about as the result of common, historical recognition of the sacredness of various NT books. Certain NT books, such as the four Gospels, Acts, and Paul’s epistles were considered inspired literature from the onset. As such, certain scribes copied them with reverential fidelity.<\/p>\n<p>Other scribes, however, felt free to make “improvements” in the text—either in the interest of doctrine and harmonization or due to the influence of a competitive oral tradition. The manuscripts produced in such a manner created a kind of “popular text”—i.e., an uncontrolled text. (This text type used to be called the “Western text,” but scholars now recognize this as a misnomer.)<\/p>\n<p>During the second century, there were a few men who produced recensions of the NT text. According to Eusebius, Theodotus (and his followers) altered the text for their own purposes. In the middle of the second century, Marcion expunged his copies of the Gospel according to Luke of all references to the Jewish background of Jesus, and Tatian’s harmony of the Gospels contains several textual alterations that gave support to ascetic views. And yet another recendor created the D-type text for the Gospels and Acts. This theologically minded redactor, living in the late second or third century, created a text that had short-lived popularity. Three third-century papyri, P29, P38, P48, each containing a portion from the book of Acts, may be precursors to the D-type text in Acts. But there are other papyri containing portions of Acts that provide even earlier testimony to a purer form of Acts—namely, P45 (c. 150) and P91 (c. 200), thereby showing that the D-type text of Acts did not necessarily antedate the purer form.<\/p>\n<p>Besides these endeavors—which are all noted for creating textual impurities—there was no recension of the NT text in the second century. Rather, it was a period in which there were scribes who exercised freedom in copying and those who demonstrated acumen. The manuscripts produced by the latter are those that come closest to preserving the original text. A prime example of an accurate late-second-century manuscript is P75.<\/p>\n<p>It is a well-known fact that the text produced by the scribe of P75 is a very accurate manuscript. It is also well-known that P75 was the kind of manuscript used in formulating Codex Vaticanus—the readings of P75 and B are remarkably similar. Prior to the discovery of P75, certain scholars thought Codex Vaticanus was the work of a fourth-century recension; others (chiefly Hort) thought it must trace back to a very early and accurate copy. Hort said that Codex Vaticanus preserves “not only a very ancient text, but a very pure line of a very ancient text” (Westcott and Hort, <em>The<\/em> <em>Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> pp 250–51). P75 appears to have shown that Hort was right.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the discovery of P75, many textual scholars were convinced that the second- and third-century papyri displayed a text in flux, a text characterized only by individual independence. The Chester Beatty Papyrus, P45, and the Bodmer Papyri, P66 and P72 (in 2 Peter and Jude), show this kind of independence. Scholars thought that scribes at Alexandria must have used several such texts to produce a good recension—as is exhibited in Codex Vaticanus. But we now know that Codex Vaticanus was not the result of a scholarly recension, resulting from editorial selection across the various textual histories. Rather, it is now quite clear that Codex Vaticanus was simply a copy (with some modifications) of a manuscript much like P75, not a fourth-century recension.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars may point out that this does not automatically mean that P75 and B represent the original text. What it does mean, they say, is that we have a second-century manuscript showing great affinity with a fourth-century manuscript whose quality has been highly esteemed. But various scholars have demonstrated that there was no Alexandrian recension before the time of P75 (late second century) and B (early fourth) and that both these manuscripts represent a relatively pure form of preservation of a relatively pure line of descent from the original text.<\/p>\n<p>The current view about the early text is that certain scribes in Alexandria and\/or scribes familiar with Alexandrian scriptoral practices (perhaps those in Oxyrhynchus) were probably responsible for maintaining a relatively pure text throughout the second, third, and fourth centuries. The Alexandrian scribes, associated with or actually employed by the scriptorium of the great Alexandrian library and\/or members of the scriptorium associated with the catechetical school at Alexandria (called the <em>Didaskelion<\/em>), were trained philologists, grammarians, and textual critics. Their work on the NT was not recensional—that is, it was not an organized emendation of the text. Rather, the work of purification and preservation was probably done here and there by various individuals trained in text criticism. This is apparent in the production of P66, which contains the Gospel of John. This manuscript was probably produced in an Egyptian scriptorium by a novice scribe who made many blunders, which were subsequently corrected by another scribe working in the same scriptorium. The first text produced by the novice could be classified as being very “free,” but the corrected text is far more accurate. (See the discussion on this manuscript above.)<\/p>\n<p>What appears to have happened with the copying of the NT text in the early period in Egypt has been poignantly characterized by Zuntz. He said that when a book was immensely popular (such as Homer’s <em>Iliad<\/em> and <em>Odyssey,<\/em> or Plato’s writings), it was copied with wild enthusiasm by novice and scholar alike. But when grammarians and scribes got ahold of it, they tried to rid it of textual corruption. In the process, however, they may have obliterated some authentic readings, but not many. Thus, the popular text (also known as the “Western text”) could have preserved the original wording in some cases. The popular or free kind of text is displayed in several third-century manuscripts: P9, P37, P40, P45, P72, and P78.<\/p>\n<p>In brief, this popular text is usually displayed in any kind of manuscript that was not produced by Alexandrian influences. This text, given to independence, is not as trustworthy as the Alexandrian text type. But because the Alexandrian text is known as a polished text, the popular text sometimes preserved the original wording. When a variant reading has the support of “Western” and Alexandrian texts, it is very likely original; but when the two are divided, the Alexandrian witnesses more often preserve the original wording.<\/p>\n<p>One dilemma still remains for some textual critics. They cannot explain how a P75\/B-type text coexisted with a Western-type text in the second century. All that can be said is that the Western text generally appears to be inferior to the P75\/B-type text. Of course, this kind of judgment troubles certain scholars, who point out that the esteem given to B and P75 is based on a subjective appreciation of the kind of text they contain (as over against the Western text) rather than on any kind of theoretical reconstruction of the early transmission of the text. This same subjective estimation was at work when Westcott and Hort decided that B was intrinsically superior to D (see their <em>Introduction,<\/em> pp 32–42). Yet the praxis of textual criticism time and again demonstrates that the P75\/B-type text is intrinsically superior to the Western text.<\/p>\n<p>In the final analysis, the manuscripts that represent a pure preservation of the original text are usually those called “Alexandrian.” Some scholars, such as Bruce Metzger, have called the earlier manuscripts “protoAlexandrian,” for they (or manuscripts like them) are thought of as being used to compose an Alexandrian-type text. However, this is looking at things from the perspective of the fourth century. We should look at things from the second century onward and then compare fourth-century manuscripts to those of the second. The second-century manuscripts could still be called “Alexandrian” in the sense that they were produced under Alexandrian influences. Perhaps a distinguishing terminology could be “early Alexandrian” (pre-Constantine) and “later Alexandrian” (post-Constantine). Manuscripts designated as “early Alexandrian” would generally be purer, less editorialized. Manuscripts designated “later Alexandrian” would display editorialization, as well as the influence of other textual traditions.<\/p>\n<p>The “early Alexandrian” text is reflected in many second- and third-century manuscripts. On the top of the list is P75 (c. 175), the work of a competent and careful scribe. Not far behind in quality is P4+P64+P67 (c. 150), the work of an excellent copyist. Other extremely good copies are P1 (c. 200), P20 (early third century), P23 (c. 200), P27 (third century), P28 (third century), P32 (c. 150), P39 (third century), P46 (c. 125), P65 (third century), P66 (in its corrected form—P66<span>c<\/span>; c. 150), P70 (third century), P77 (c. 150), P87 (c. 125), P90 (c. 175), and P91 (c. 200). Several of these manuscripts have been placed in the “strict” category by textual critics Kurt and Barbara Aland—that is, they exhibit “strict” scribal control and therefore are accurate copies of an exemplar, if not the original. These manuscripts are P1, P23, P35, P37, P39, P64\/67, P65, P70, and P75.<\/p>\n<p>The “later Alexandrian” text, which displays editorial polishing, is exhibited in a few manuscripts, such as א (fourth century), T (fifth century), ע (seventh century), L (eighth century), 33 (ninth century), 1739 (a tenth-century manuscript copied from a fourth-century Alexandrian manuscript much like P46), and 579 (13th century). Beginning in the fifth century, Byzantine-type manuscripts began to make their influence in Egypt. Some manuscripts dated around 400 that came from Egypt clearly reflect this influence; Codex Alexandrinus (A) is probably the best example. Other Egyptian manuscripts of this era, such as Codex Sinaiticus (א) and Codex Washingtonianus (W) display large-scale harmonization, which cannot be directly linked to any kind of recension.<\/p>\n<p>At the end of the third century, another kind of Greek text came into being and then grew in popularity until it became the dominant text-type throughout Christendom. This is the text-type first instigated by Lucian of Antioch, according to Jerome (in his introduction to his Latin translation of the Gospels). Lucian’s text was a definite recension (i.e., a purposely created edition)—as opposed to the Alexandrian text-type that came about as the result of a process wherein the Alexandrian scribes, upon comparing many manuscripts, attempted to preserve the best text—thereby serving more as textual critics than editors. Of course, the Alexandrians did do some editing—such as we would call copy-editing. The Lucianic text is the outgrowth and culmination of the popular text; it is characterized by smoothness of language, which is achieved by the removal of obscurities and awkward grammatical constructions and by the conflation of variant readings. Lucian (and\/or his associates) must have used many different kinds of manuscripts of varying qualities to produce a harmonized, edited NT text. The kind of editorial work that went into the Lucianic text is what we would call substantive editing.<\/p>\n<p>Lucian’s text was produced prior to the Diocletian persecution (c. 303), during which time many copies of the NT were confiscated and destroyed. Not long after this period of devastation, Constantine came to power and then recognized Christianity as the state religion. There was, of course, a great need for copies of the NT to be made and distributed to churches throughout the Mediterranean world. It was at this time that Lucian’s text began to be propagated by bishops going out from the Antiochan school to churches throughout the East, taking the text with them. Lucian’s text soon became the standard text of the Eastern church and formed the basis for the Byzantine text—and is thus the ultimate authority for the Textus Receptus.<\/p>\n<p>While Lucian was forming his recension of the NT text, the Alexandrian text was taking on its final shape. As was mentioned earlier, the formation of the Alexandrian text-type was the result of a process (as opposed to a single editorial recension). The formation of the Alexandrian text involved minor textual criticism (i.e., selecting variant readings among various manuscripts) and copyediting (i.e., producing a readable text). There was far less tampering with the text in the Alexandrian text-type than in the Lucian, and the underlying manuscripts for the Alexandrian text-type were superior to those used by Lucian. Perhaps Hesychius was responsible for giving the Alexandrian text its final shape, and Athanasius of Alexandria may have been the one who made this text the archetypal text for Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>As the years went by, there were fewer and fewer Alexandrian manuscripts produced, and more and more Byzantine manuscripts manufactured. Very few Egyptians continued to read Greek (with the exception of those in St Catherine’s Monastery, the site of the discovery of Codex Sinaiticus), and the rest of the Mediterranean world turned to Latin. It was only those in the Greek-speaking churches in Greece and Byzantium that continued to make copies of the Greek text. For century after century—from the 6th to the 14th—the great majority of NT manuscripts were produced in Byzantium, all bearing the same kind of text. When the first Greek NT was printed (c. 1525), it was based on a Greek text that Erasmus had compiled, using a few late Byzantine manuscripts. This printed text, with minor revisions, became the Textus Receptus.<\/p>\n<p>Beginning in the 17th century, earlier manuscripts began to be discovered—manuscripts with a text that differed from that found in the Textus Receptus. Around 1630, Codex Alexandrinus was brought to England. An early fifth-century manuscript, containing the entire NT, it provided a good, early witness to the NT text (it is an especially good witness to the original text of Revelation). Two hundred years later, a German scholar named Constantin von Tischendorf discovered Codex Sinaiticus in St Catherine’s Monastery (located near Mt Sinai). The manuscript, dated around <span>AD<\/span> 360, is one of the two oldest vellum (treated animal hide) manuscripts of the Greek NT. The earliest vellum manuscript, Codex Vaticanus, had been in the Vatican’s library since at least 1481, but it had not been made available to scholars until the middle of the 19th century. This manuscript, dated slightly earlier (<span>AD<\/span> 350) than Codex Sinaiticus, had both the OT and NT in Greek, excluding the last part of the NT (Hebrews 9:15 to Revelation 22:21 and the Pastoral Epistles). A hundred years of textual criticism has determined that this manuscript is one of the most accurate and reliable witnesses to the original text.<\/p>\n<p>Other early and important manuscripts were discovered in the 19th century. Through the tireless labors of men like Constantin von Tischendorf, Samuel Tregelles, and F. H. A. Scrivener, manuscripts such as Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, Codex Zacynthius, and Codex Augiensis were deciphered, collated, and published.<\/p>\n<p>As the various manuscripts were discovered and made public, certain scholars labored to compile a Greek text that would more closely represent the original text than did the Textus Receptus. Around 1700 John Mill produced an improved Textus Receptus, and in the 1730s Johannes Albert Bengel (known as the father of modern textual and philological studies in the NT) published a text that deviated from the Textus Receptus according to the evidence of earlier manuscripts.<\/p>\n<p>In the 1800s certain scholars began to abandon the Textus Receptus. Karl Lachman, a classical philologist, produced a fresh text (in 1831) that represented the fourth-century manuscripts. Samuel Tregelles (self-taught in Latin, Hebrew, and Greek), laboring throughout his entire lifetime, concentrated all of his efforts in publishing one Greek text (which came out in six parts, from 1857 to 1872). As is stated in the introduction to this work, Tregelles’s goal was “to exhibit the text of the NT in the very words in which it has been transmitted on the evidence of ancient authority.” Henry Alford also compiled a Greek text based upon the best and earliest manuscripts. In his preface to <em>The Greek New Testament<\/em> (a multivolume commentary on the Greek NT, published in 1849), Alford said he labored for the “demolition of the unworthy and pedantic reverence for the received text, which stood in the way of all chance of discovering the genuine word of God.”<\/p>\n<p>During this same era, Tischendorf was devoting a lifetime of labor to discovering manuscripts and producing accurate editions of the Greek NT. In a letter to his fiancé he wrote, “I am confronted with a sacred task, the struggle to regain the original form of the NT.” In fulfillment of his desire, he discovered Codex Sinaiticus, deciphered the palimpsest Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, collated countless manuscripts, and produced several editions of the Greek NT (the eighth edition is considered the best).<\/p>\n<p>Aided by the work of the previous scholars, two British men, Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort, worked together for 28 years to produce a volume entitled <em>The New Testament in the Original Greek<\/em> (1881). Along with this publication, they made known their theory (which was chiefly Hort’s) that Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus (along with a few other early manuscripts) represented a text that most closely replicated the original writing. They called this text the Neutral Text. (According to their studies, the Neutral Text described certain manuscripts that had the least amount of textual corruption.) This is the text that Westcott and Hort relied upon for compiling their volume.<\/p>\n<p>The 19th century was a fruitful era for the recovery of the Greek NT; the 20th century, no less so. Those living in the 20th century have witnessed the discovery of the Oxyrhynchus Papyri, the Chester Beatty Papyri, and the Bodmer Papyri. To date, there are nearly 100 papyri containing portions of the NT—several of which date from the late first century to the early fourth century. These significant discoveries, providing scholars with many ancient manuscripts, have greatly enhanced the effort to recover the original wording of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>At the beginning of the 20th century, Eberhard Nestle used the best editions of the Greek NT produced in the 19th century to compile a text that represented the majority consensus. The work of making new editions was carried on by his son for several years, and then came under the care of Kurt Aland. The latest edition (the 27th) of Nestle-Aland’s <em>Novum Testamentum Graece<\/em> appeared in 1993. The same Greek text appears in another popular volume published by the United Bible Societies, called the <em>Greek New Testament<\/em> (fourth edition). Aland has argued that the Nestle-Aland text, 27th edition (NA<span>27<\/span>), comes closer to the original text of the NT than did Tischendorf or Westcott and Hort. And in several writings he intimates that NA<span>27<\/span> may very well be the original text. Though few, if any, scholars would agree with this, the 27th edition of the Nestle-Aland text is regarded by many as representing the latest and best in textual scholarship.<\/p>\n<h5>New Testament Textual Criticism<\/h5>\n<p>Textual critics working with ancient literature universally acknowledge the supremacy of earlier manuscripts over later ones. Textual critics not working with the NT would love to have the same kind of early witnesses that biblical scholars possess. In fact, many of them work with manuscripts written 1,000 years after the autographs were composed! We all marvel that the Dead Sea Scrolls have provided a text that is nearly 800 years closer to the originals than the Masoretic manuscripts, and yet many of the Dead Sea manuscripts are still over 600 to 800 years removed from the time of original composition. NT textual critics have a great advantage!<\/p>\n<p>The 19th-century NT textual scholars—such as Lachmann, Tregelles, Tischendorf, Westcott and Hort—worked on the basis that the earliest witnesses are the best witnesses. Some textual scholars have continued this line of recovery using the testimony of the earlier witnesses. But many textual scholars since the time of Westcott and Hort have been less inclined to produce editions based on the theory that the earliest reading is the best. Most present-day textual critics are more inclined to endorse the maxim: the reading that is most likely original is the one that best explains the variants.<\/p>\n<p>This maxim (or “canon” as it is sometimes called), as good as it is, produces conflicting results. For example, two scholars, using this same principle to examine the same variant unit, will not agree. One will argue that one variant was produced by a copyist attempting to emulate the author’s style; the other will claim the same variant has to be original because it accords with the author’s style. One will argue that one variant was produced by an orthodox scribe attempting to rid the text of a reading that could be used to promote heterodoxy or heresy; another will claim that the same variant has to be original because it is orthodox and accords with Christian doctrine (thus a heterodox or heretical scribe must have changed it). Furthermore, this principle allows for the possibility that the reading selected for the text can be taken from any manuscript of any date. This can lead to subjective eclecticism.<\/p>\n<p>Modern textual scholars have attempted to temper the subjectivism by employing a method called “reasoned eclecticism.” This kind of eclecticism applies a combination of internal and external considerations, whereby the character of the variants is evaluated in light of the manuscripts’ evidence and vice versa. This is supposed to produce a balanced view and serve as a check against purely subjective tendencies.<\/p>\n<p>The Alands favor the same kind of approach, calling it the local-genealogical method, which is defined as follows:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>It is impossible to proceed from the assumption of a manuscript stemma, and on the basis of a full review and analysis of the relationships obtaining among the variety of interrelated branches in the manuscript tradition, to undertake a recension of the data as one would do with other Greek texts. Decisions must be made one by one, instance by instance. This method has been characterized as eclecticism, but wrongly so. After carefully establishing the variety of readings offered in a passage and the possibilities of their interpretation, it must always then be determined afresh on the basis of external and internal criteria which of these readings (and frequently they are quite numerous) is the original, from which the others may be regarded as derivative. From the perspective of our present knowledge, this “local-genealogical” method (if it must be given a name) is the only one which meets the requirements of the NT textual tradition. (Introduction to <em>Novum Testamentum Graece,<\/em> 26th edition)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>The “local-genealogical” method assumes that for any given variation unit any manuscript (or manuscripts) may have preserved the original text. Applying this method produces an extremely uneven documentary presentation of the text. Anyone studying the critical apparatus of NA<span>27<\/span> will detect that there is not an even documentary presentation. The eclecticism is dispersed throughout the text.<\/p>\n<p>“Reasoned eclecticism” and\/or the “local-genealogical” method tend to give priority to internal evidence over external evidence. But it has to be the other way around if we are going to recover the original text. This was Westcott and Hort’s opinion. With respect to their compilation of <em>The New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> Hort wrote, “Documentary evidence has been in most cases allowed to confer the place of honour against internal evidence” (<em>The Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> p 17).<\/p>\n<p>In this respect, Westcott and Hort need to be revived. Earnest Colwell was of the same mind when he wrote “Hort Redivivus: A Plea and a Program.” Colwell decried the growing tendency to rely entirely on the internal evidence of readings, without serious consideration of documentary evidence. He called upon scholars to make an attempt to reconstruct a history of the manuscript tradition. The abundance of manuscripts—several of which are very early—will aid scholars in this ongoing task.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BIBLE*, M<span>anuscripts and Text of the (New Testament)<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Copies of the NT books produced by scribes and editions made from these copies. In the centuries prior to the simultaneous-multiple production of copies via dictation (wherein many scribes in a scriptorium transcribed a text dictated to them by one reader), all manuscript copies were made singly—each scribe producing a copy from an exemplar.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the 15th century, when Johannes Gutenberg invented movable type for the printing press, all copies of any work of literature were made by hand (hence, the name “manuscript”). According to a current tabulation, there are 99 papyrus manuscripts, 257 uncial manuscripts, and 2,795 minuscule manuscripts. We can add 2,209 Greek lectionaries to this list. Therefore, we have over 5,350 manuscript copies of the Greek NT or portions thereof. No other work of Greek literature can boast of such numbers.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Important Papyrus Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>• Important Uncial Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>• The Text of the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ImportantPapyrusManuscripts\">Important Papyrus Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>Papyrus is a tall, aquatic reed, the pith of which is cut into strips, laid in a crosswork pattern and glued together to make a page for writing. The papyrus rolls of Egypt have been used as a writing surface since the early third millennium <span>BC<\/span>. The Greeks adopted papyrus around 900 <span>BC<\/span>, and later the Romans adopted its use. However, the oldest extant Greek rolls of papyrus date from the fourth century <span>BC<\/span>. Unfortunately, papyrus is perishable, requiring a dry climate for its preservation. That is why so many papyri have been discovered in the desert sands of Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>The NT papyrus manuscripts (abbreviated as “P”) are generally the earliest manuscripts of the NT. Broadly speaking, the most important ones can be categorized in three groups: the Oxyrhynchus Papyri (from Oxyrhynchus, Egypt), (2) the Beatty Papyri (named after the owner); and (3) the Bodmer Papyri (named after the owner).<\/p>\n<h5>The Oxyrhynchus Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>Beginning in 1898 B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt discovered thousands of papyrus fragments in the ancient rubbish heaps of Oxyrhynchus, Egypt. This site yielded volumes of papyrus fragments containing all sorts of written material (literature, business and legal contracts, letters, etc.) as well as over 40 manuscripts containing portions of the NT. Some of the more noteworthy papyrus manuscripts from Oxyrhynchus are as follows:<\/p>\n<h6>P1 (P. Oxy. 2)<\/h6>\n<p>This late second-century manuscript contains Matthew 1:1-9, 12, 14-20. Grenfell and Hunt in the winter of 1896–97 went to Oxyrhynchus (now called El Bahnasa) in search of ancient Christian documents. P1 was discovered on the second day of the dig. At the time of this discovery, this was the earliest extant copy of any NT portion—at least 100 years earlier than Codex Vaticanus. The copyist of P1 seems to have faithfully followed a very reliable exemplar. Where there are major variants, P1 agrees with the best Alexandrian witnesses, especially B (Codex Vaticanus), from which it rarely varies.<\/p>\n<h6>P5 (P. Oxy. 208 and 1781)<\/h6>\n<p>Two separate portions of this third-century manuscript were unearthed from Oxyrhynchus by Grenfell and Hunt, both from the same papyrus manuscript. The first portion contains John 1:23-31, 33-40 on one fragment and John 20:11-17 on another—probably on the first and last quires of a manuscript containing only the Gospel of John. This portion was published in volume II of <em>Oxyrhynchus Papyri<\/em> in 1899; the second portion—containing John 16:14-30—was not published until 1922 in volume XV of <em>Oxyrhynchus Papyri.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>After examining the first portion, Grenfell and Hunt said, “The text is a good one, and appears to have affinities with that of Codex Sinaiticus, with which the papyrus agrees in several readings not found elsewhere.” The papyrus, written in a documentary hand, is marked for its brevity.<\/p>\n<h6>P13 (P. Oxy. 657 and PSI 1292)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated between 175 and 225, contains 12 columns from a roll preserving the text of Hebrews 2:14–5:5; 10:8-22; 10:29–11:13; 11:28–12:7. The text of Hebrews was written in a reformed documentary hand on the back of the papyrus containing the new epitome of Livy. For this reason, some scholars think the manuscript was possibly brought to Egpyt by a Roman official and left behind when he left his post. P13 very often agrees with B, and it supplements B where it is lacking—namely, from Hebrews 9:14 to the end of Hebrews. P13 and P46 display nearly the same text. Out of a total of 88 variation-units, there are 71 agreements and only 17 disagreements.<\/p>\n<h6>P77 (P. Oxy. 2683 + 4405)<\/h6>\n<p>Dated c. 150–75, this is the earliest manuscript of Matthew (23:30-39). The manuscript is clearly a literary production. It was written in an elegant hand and has what was or became a standard system of chapter division, as well as punctuation and breathing marks. P77 has close textual affinities with Codex Sinaiticus.<\/p>\n<h6>P90 (P. Oxy. 3523)<\/h6>\n<p>This second-century manuscript (c. 150–75) contains John 18:36–19:7. The handwriting (an upright, rounded, elegant script) is much like that found in P66. Furthermore, P90 has more affinity with P66 than with any other single manuscript, though it does not concur with P66 in its entirety.<\/p>\n\n<h6>P. Oxy. 4404<\/h6>\n<p>Containing Matthew 21:34-37, 43, 45, this manuscript could be the earliest extant manuscript of the NT in that the script is early Roman and therefore could be dated to the early second century.<\/p>\n<h5>The Chester Beatty Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>These manuscripts were purchased from a dealer in Egypt during the 1930s by Chester Beatty and by the University of Michigan. The three manuscripts in this collection are very early and contain a large portion of the NT text. P45 (c. 200) contains portions of all four Gospels and Acts; P46 (c. 125) has almost all of Paul’s epistles and Hebrews; and P47 (third century) contains Revelation 9–17.<\/p>\n<h6>P45 (Chester Beatty Papyrus I)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex has the four Gospels and Acts (Mt 20:24-32; 21:13-19; 25:41–26:39; Mk 4:36–9:31; 11:27–12:28; Lk 6:31–7:7; 9:26–14:33; Jn 4:51–5:2, 21-25; 10:7-25; 10:30–11:10, 18-36, 42-57; Acts 4:27–17:17). The order of books in the original intact manuscript was probably as follows: Matthew, John, Luke, Mark, Acts (the so-called Western order). This manuscript was dated by Kenyon to the early third century, a date that was confirmed by the papyrologists W. Schubart and H. I. Bell. This continues to be the date assigned to this manuscript in modern handbooks on textual criticism and critical editions of the Greek NT, but the consistent formation of certain letters suggests an earlier date—maybe sometime in the late second century.<\/p>\n<p>The scribe of P45 worked without any intention of exactly reproducing his source. He wrote with a great amount of freedom—harmonizing, smoothing out, substituting at will. In short, the scribe did not actually copy words. He saw through the language to its idea-content, and copied that in words of his own choosing, or in rearranged order. Thus, in the scribe of P45 we see an exegete and a paraphraser.<\/p>\n<h6>P46 (Chester Beatty Papyrus II)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex has most of Paul’s epistles (excluding the Pastorals) in this order: Romans 5:17–6:14; 8:15–15:9; 15:11–16:27; Hebrews 1:1–13:25; 1 Corinthians 1:1–16:22; 2 Corinthians 1:1–13:13; Ephesians 1:1–6:24; Galatians 1:1–6:18; Philippians 1:1–4:23; Colossians 1:1–4:18; 1 Thessalonians 1:1; 1:9–2:3; 5:5-9, 23-28 (with minor lacunae in each of the books).<\/p>\n<p>The manuscript was originally dated to the early third century. But others, since, have dated the manuscript earlier in the second century. The scribe who produced this manuscript used an early, excellent exemplar. He was a professional scribe because there are stichoi notations at the end of several books (see the conclusion of Romans, 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, Philippians). The stichoi were used by professionals to note how many lines had been copied for commensurate pay. Most likely, the ex officio of the scriptorium (perhaps connected with a church library) paginated the codex and indicated the stichoi. The scribe himself made a few corrections as he went, and then several other readers made corrections here and there.<\/p>\n<p>The text of P46 shows a strong affinity with B (especially in Ephesians, Colossians, and Hebrews) and next with א (Codex Sinaiticus). P46 agrees much less with the later representatives of the Alexandrian text. In short, P46 is proto-Alexandrian. In Hebrews, P46 and P13 display nearly the same text. Out of a total of 88 variation-units, there are 71 agreements and only 17 disagreements.<\/p>\n<h6>P47 (Chester Beatty Papyrus III)<\/h6>\n<p>This third-century codex contains Revelation 9:10–17:2. The text of P47 agrees more often with that of Codex Sinaiticus than with any other manuscript (including Codex Alexandrinus and Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus), though it often shows independence.<\/p>\n<h5>The Bodmer Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>These manuscripts were purchased by M. Martin Bodmer from a dealer in Egypt during the 1950s and 1960s. The three important papyri in this collection are P66 (c. 175, containing almost all of John), P72 (third century, having all of 1 and 2 Peter and Jude), and P75 (c. 200, containing large parts of Luke 3—John 15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h4\" id=\"P66\">P66 (Papyrus Bodmer II)<\/p>\n<p>This manuscript contains most of John’s Gospel (1:1–6:11; 6:35–14:26, 29-30; 15:2-26; 16:2-4, 6-7; 16:10–20:20, 22-23; 20:25–21:9). The manuscript does not include the pericope of the adulteress (7:53–8:11), making it the earliest witness to not include this spurious passage. The manuscript is usually dated as c. 200, but the renowned paleographer Herbert Hunger has argued that P66 should be dated to the first half, if not the first quarter, of the second century.<\/p>\n<p>According to recent studies, it seems evident that P66 has preserved the work of three individuals: the original scribe, a thoroughgoing corrector, and a minor corrector. With a practiced calligraphic hand, the original scribe of P66 wrote in larger print as he went along in order to fill out the codex. The large print throughout indicates that it was written to be read aloud to a Christian congregation. The text exhibits the scribe’s knowledge of other portions of Scripture (inasmuch as he harmonized John 6:69 to Matthew 16:16 and John 21:6 to Luke 5:5), his use of standard <em>nomina sacra<\/em> (a way of writing divine names), and his special use of <em>nomina sacra<\/em> for the words “cross” and “crucify.”<\/p>\n<p>The original scribe was quite free in his interaction with the text; he produced several singular readings that reveal his independent interpretation of the text. While the numerous scribal mistakes would seem to indicate that the scribe was inattentive, many of the singular readings—prior to correction—reveal that he was not detached from the narrative of the text. Rather, he became so absorbed in his reading that he often forgot the exact words he was copying. His task as a copyist was to duplicate the exemplar word for word, but this was frustrated by the fact that he was reading the text in logical semantic chunks and often became a coproducer of a new text. As a result, he continually had to stop his reading and make many in-process corrections. But he left several places uncorrected, which were later fixed by the <em>diorthotes<\/em> (official corrector). The finished product is quite good, presenting a text that is very close to the Alexandrian witnesses.<\/p>\n<h6>P72 (Papyrus Bodmer VII–VIII)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated late third century, has an interesting collection of writings in one codex: 1 Peter 1:1–5:14; 2 Peter 1:1–3:18; Jude 1:1-25; the Nativity of Mary, the apocryphal correspondence of Paul to the Corinthians, the eleventh ode of Solomon, Melito’s Homily on the Passover, a fragment of a hymn, the Apology of Phileas, and Psalms 33 and 34.<\/p>\n<p>Scholars think that four scribes took part in producing the entire manuscript. First Peter has clear Alexandrian affinities—especially with B. Second Peter and (especially) Jude display more of an uncontrolled type text (usually associated with the “Western” text), with several independent readings.<\/p>\n<h6>P75 (Papyrus Bodmer XIV–XV)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex contains most of Luke and John (Lk 3:18–4:2; 4:34–5:10; 5:37–18:18; 22:4–24:53; Jn 1:1–11:45, 48-57; 12:3–13:1, 8-9; 14:8-30; 15:7-8.) The manuscript does not include the pericope of the adulteress (7:53–8:11). The manuscript can be dated to the late second or early third century.<\/p>\n<p>The copyist of P75 was a literate scribe trained in making books. His craftsmanship shows through in his tight calligraphy and controlled copying. The handwriting displayed in this manuscript is typically called by paleographers the common angular type of the late second to early third century. The scribe’s Christianity shows in his abbreviations of the <em>nomina sacra<\/em><em>,<\/em> as well as in his abbreviation of the word “cross.” These are telltale signs of a scribe who belonged to the Christian community. Furthermore, the large typeface indicates that the manuscript was composed to be read aloud to a Christian congregation. The scribe even added a system of sectional divisions to aid any would-be lector. Thus, we have a manuscript written by a Christian for other Christians.<\/p>\n<p>There are several indications of the scribe’s Alexandrian orientation. First and foremost is his scriptoral acumen. He is the best of all the early Christian scribes, and his manuscript is an extremely accurate copy. P75 is the work of an extremely disciplined scribe who copied with the intention of being careful and accurate. Scholars generally agree that P75 displays the kind of text that was used in making Codex Vaticanus (there is 87 percent agreement between P75 and B). As such, textual scholars have a high regard for P75’s textual fidelity.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Other Papyrus Manuscripts<\/h5>\n<h6>P4 + P64 + P67<\/h6>\n<p>These three papyrus manuscripts are part of one codex dated <span>AD<\/span> 150–175. The manuscript was the work of a professional scribe, and the text is extremely accurate.<\/p>\n<h6>P32 (Rylands Papyrus 5)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, preserving Titus 1:11-15; 2:3-8, is dated c. 175, making it the earliest extant copy of any of the Pastoral Epistles. P32 shows agreement with א and with F and G. Since F and G (nearly identical manuscripts) go back to the same archetype, it is possible that P32 could be linked to the same source.<\/p>\n<h6>P52 (Rylands Papyrus 457)<\/h6>\n<p>This fragment, containing John 18:31-34, 37-38, is noteworthy because of its date: c. 110–125. Many scholars (F. Kenyon, H. I. Bell, A. Deissmann, and W. H. P. Hatch) have confirmed this dating. The manuscript came from the Fayum or Oxyrhynchus site. It was acquired in 1920 by Grenfell, but it remained unnoticed among hundreds of papyri until 1934, when C. H. Roberts recognized that this fragment preserves a few verses from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ImportantUncialManuscripts\">Important Uncial Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>The manuscripts typically classified as “uncial” are so designated to differentiate them from papyrus manuscripts. In a sense, this is a misnomer because the real difference has to do with the material they are written on—vellum (treated animal hide) as compared to papyrus—not the kind of letters used. Indeed, the papyri are also written in uncials (capital letters), but the term “uncial” typically describes the majuscule lettering that was prominent in fourth-century biblical texts, such as in א, A, B, C.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Sinaiticus (or א)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex contains the entire OT and the NT in this order: the four Gospels, the Pauline Epistles (including Hebrews), Acts, the General Epistles, Revelation. It also includes the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas. The codex cannot be earlier than 340 (the year Eusebius died) because the Eusebian sections of the text are indicated in the margins of the Gospels by a contemporary hand. Most scholars date it 350–375.<\/p>\n<p>This codex was discovered by Constantin von Tischendorf in St Catherine’s Monastery (situated at the foot of Mt Sinai). On a visit to the monastery in 1844 he noticed in a wastebasket some parchment leaves that were being used to light the lamps. He was allowed to take this waste paper, which proved to be 43 leaves from various parts of the Greek translation of the OT.<\/p>\n<p>In 1853 he made a second trip to the monastery and found nothing. In 1859, however, on his third trip, he found not only other parts of the OT but also the complete NT. He was finally able to persuade the monastery authorities to present the manuscript to the czar, the great patron of the Greek Catholic Church, who placed it in the Imperial Library in St Petersburg. The czar gave great honors to the monastery and its authorities, and everybody seemed well pleased. Later Tischendorf was charged with having stolen the manuscript from its lawful owners, but the better textual scholars do not accept that story.<\/p>\n\n<p>The manuscript remained in the Imperial Library until 1933, when it was purchased by the British Museum for the huge sum of £100,000 (about $500,000). Textual criticism made the headlines because one manuscript was bought for this much money, raised largely by public subscription during the Great Depression. The manuscript is now on display in the manuscript room of the museum, where it is considered one of its most prized possessions.<\/p>\n<p>The text of Sinaiticus is very closely related to that of Codex Vaticanus. They agree in presenting the purest type of text, usually called the Alexandrian text type. Tischendorf greatly used the textual evidence of Codex Sinaiticus in preparing his critical editions of the Greek NT. Tischendorf thought four scribes had originally produced the codex, whom he named scribes A, B, C, D. After reinvestigation, H. J. Milne and T. C. Skeat identified only three scribes: A (who wrote the historical and poetical books of the OT, as well as most of the NT), B (who wrote the Prophets and the Shepherd of Hermas), and D (who wrote some Psalms, Tobit, Judith, and 4 Maccabees, and redid small sections of the NT). Milne and Skeat demonstrated that scribe A of Codex Vaticanus was likely the same scribe as scribe D of Codex Sinaiticus. If this true, then א is contemporary with B—perhaps produced in the same scriptorium in Alexandria. Codex Sinaiticus provides a fairly reliable witness to the NT; however, the scribe was not as careful as the scribe of B.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Alexandrinus (A)<\/h5>\n<p>This is one of the three most important codices containing early copies of the whole Bible in Greek (the other two being the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus codexes). The name Alexandrinus comes from ancient records suggesting that it was copied in Egypt during the early part of the fifth century <span>AD<\/span>. The early history of this manuscript and its Egyptian provenance is partially revealed by its flyleaves. A note by Cyril of Lucar (patriarch of Alexandria and then of Constantinople in the 1620s) states that, according to tradition, it was written by Thecla, a noble lady of Egypt shortly after the Council of Nicaea (325) and that her name was originally inscribed at the end of the volume but the last page was lost due to mutilation. An Arabic note of the 13th or 14th century also says that the manuscript was written by “Thecla the martyr.” Another Arabic note says that is was presented to the patriarchal cell of Alexandria (c. 1098). Cyril of Lucar took the manuscript from Alexandria to Constantinople in 1621 and then gave it to Charles I of England in 1627, where it became part of the Royal Library, then later the British Museum.<\/p>\n<p>Only 773 of the original 820 or so pages still exist. The rest were lost as the book was passed down through the centuries. The surviving parts of Alexandrinus contain a Greek translation of the whole OT, the Apocrypha (including four books of Maccabees and Psalm 151), most of the NT, and some early Christian writings (of which the First and Second Epistles of Clement to the Corinthians are the most important).<\/p>\n<p>Frederick Kenyon thought the codex was the work of five scribes, to each of whom he designated a Roman numeral. According to Kenyon, scribes I and II copied the OT; scribe III did Matthew, Mark, 1 Corinthians 10:8—Philemon 1:25; scribe IV did Luke—Acts, General Epistles, Romans 1:1—1 Corinthians 10:8; and scribe V did Revelation. Milne and Skeat, however, argued that the whole codex was the work of two copyists (I and II). W. H. P. Hatch noted that many corrections have been made in the manuscript, most of them at an early date. Some of these corrections were introduced by the scribe himself, and others came from later hands.<\/p>\n<p>Evidently, the scribes of this codex used exemplars of varying quality for various sections of the NT. The exemplar used for the Gospels was of poor quality, reflecting a Byzantine text type. Its testimony in the Epistles is much better, and in Revelation it provides the best witness to the original text.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Codex Vaticanus (B)<\/h5>\n<p>Codex Vaticanus is the Vatican Manuscript, so named because it is the most famous manuscript in the Vatican Library in Rome. This manuscript has been in the Vatican’s library since at least 1475, but it was not made available to scholars, such as Constantin von Tischendorf and Samuel Tregelles, until the middle of the 19th century.<\/p>\n<p>At one time, the codex contained the whole Greek Bible, including most of the books of the Apocrypha, but it has lost many of its leaves. Originally it must have had about 820 leaves (1,640 pp), but now it has 759—617 in the OT and 142 in the NT. The major gaps of the manuscript are Genesis 1:1–46:28; 2 Samuel 2:5-7, 10-13; Psalms 106:27–138:6; Hebrews 9:14–13:25; the Pastoral Epistles; and Revelation. Each leaf measures ten and a half by ten inches (26.7 by 25.4 centimeters). Each page has three columns (two for the poetical books) with 40 to 44 lines to the column. The manuscript was written by two different scribes. It is dated in the early to middle part of the fourth century. It is not known where the manuscript originated, but it has been in the Vatican Library from the time of its earliest catalog in 1475.<\/p>\n\n<p>When Napoleon conquered Rome, he brought its treasures to Paris, including this manuscript. The scholar Hug identified it and called the attention of other scholars to it. After the downfall of Napoleon, the manuscript was returned to the Vatican Library. Competent textual scholars were not allowed to do careful work on it until a photographic edition was published in 1890. It is now on exhibit in the Vatican Library.<\/p>\n<p>The text of the Vatican Manuscript is much like that of Codex Sinaiticus. These are generally recognized as the two finest examples of the Alexandrian type of Greek text of the NT. The Greek text of the OT is very fine too, but it is not quite so important, as the original language of the OT was Hebrew. Virtually all the textual scholars since the days of Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort (who brought out their Greek Testament, including their theory of textual criticism, in 1881), recognize this neutral type of text as a very early text and a very pure text, an extremely accurate reproduction of what the original text must have been. Westcott and Hort called it a second-century text accurate in 999 out of 1,000 words so far as any matter of translatable difference was concerned. א and B are the finest examples of this type of text, but it is also found in a few other Greek uncial manuscripts, a few of the early translations, and in the writings of a few of the early church fathers. Since the days of Westcott and Hort, their theory has been confirmed by the discovery of some papyrus manuscripts, notably the Bodmer Papyri, discovered in the 1950s.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus (C)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex is a palimpsest (the original writing was erased and different words written on the same material). It originally contained the entire Bible but now has only parts of six OT books and portions of all NT books except 2 Thessalonians and 2 John. The single-column Bible text, written in the 5th century <span>AD<\/span>, was erased in the 12th century and replaced by a two-column text of a Greek translation of sermons or treatises by a certain Ephraem, a 4th-century Syrian church leader. Such a practice was common in periods of economic depression or when parchment was scarce. The original writing was scraped from the writing surface and the surface smoothed. Then new compositions could be written on the prepared surface. Using chemicals Tischendorf was able to read much of the erased document.<\/p>\n<p>The manuscript may have been brought from the east to Florence by a learned Greek named Andrew John Lascar in the time of Lorenzo de’Medici. Since Lascar was known as Rhyndacenus (from the river Rhyndacus), he probably came from the region of Phrygia (site of ancient Laodicea). Where the manuscript was prior to this is not known. The Ephraemi manuscript was brought to Italy in the early sixth century, where it became the property of the Medici family. Catherine de’Medici took it to France, where it remains today.<\/p>\n<p>The text of this manuscript is mixed—it is compounded from all the major text types, agreeing frequently with the later koine of Byzantine type, which most scholars regard as the least valuable type of NT text.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Bezae (D)<\/h5>\n<p>This is a Greek-Latin diglot containing Matthew—Acts, 3 John, with lacunae. Most scholars date it late fourth or early fifth century (c. 400). Some scholars think the codex was produced in either Egypt or North Africa by a scribe whose mother tongue was Latin. Another scholar (D. C. Parker) has argued that it was copied in Beirut, a center of Latin legal studies during the fifth century, where both Latin and Greek were used. Evidently, it was produced by a scribe who knew Latin better than Greek, and then was corrected by several scribes. In any event, the codex somehow came into the hands of Theodore Beza, French scholar and successor to Calvin. Beza gave it to the Cambridge University Library in 1581.<\/p>\n<p>This codex is probably the most controversial of the NT uncials because of its marked independence. Its many additions, omissions, and alterations (especially in Luke and Acts) are the work of a significant theologian. A few earlier manuscripts (P29, P38, P48, and 0171) appear to be precursors to the type of text found in D, which is considered the principal witness of the Western text-type. Thus, Codex Bezae could be a copy of an earlier revised edition. This reviser must have been a scholar who had a propensity for adding historical, biographical, and geographical details. More than anything, he was intent on filling in gaps in the narrative by adding circumstantial details.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Washingtonianus, or The Freer Gospels (W)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex, dated around 400, has the four Gospels and Acts. It is often referred to as the Freer Gospels—named after its owner, Charles Freer. The codex likely came from the ruins of a monastery near Giza. The handwriting is quite similar to that found in a fifth-century fragment of the book of Enoch found at Akhmim in 1886.<\/p>\n<p>Codex W was copied from a parent manuscript (exemplar) that had been pieced together from several different manuscripts. This is obvious because the textual presentation of W is noticeably variegated and even the stratification of the text is matched by similar variations in paragraphing. The scribe who collated the parent manuscript drew upon various sources to put together his Gospel codex. It is likely that the scribe of the parent manuscript used a text that came from North Africa (the “Western” text) for the first part of Mark, and the scribe of W used manuscripts from Antioch for Matthew and the second part of Luke to fill the gaps in the more ancient manuscript he was copying. Detailed textual analysis reveals the variegated textual stratifications of W, as follows: in Matthew the text is Byzantine; in Mark the text is first Western (1:1–5:30), then Caesarean in Mark 5:31–16:20 (akin to P45); in Luke the text is first Alexandrian (1:1–8:12), then Byzantine. John is more complicated because the first part of John (1:1–5:11), which fills a quire, was the work of a seventh-century scribe who must have replaced a damaged quire. (W<span>s<\/span> designates the work of this scribe.) This first section has a mixture of Alexandrian and Western readings, as does the rest of John.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex 1739<\/h5>\n<p>This tenth-century codex has Acts and the Epistles. The manuscript was discovered at Mt Athos in 1879 by E. von der Goltz. The manuscript has strong textual affinities with P46, B, 1739, Coptic Sahidic, Coptic Boharic, Clement, and Origen. The relationship between P46, B, and 1739 is remarkable because 1739 is a tenth-century manuscript that was copied from a fourth-century manuscript of excellent quality. According to a colophon, the scribe of 1739 for the Pauline Epistles followed a manuscript that came from Caesarea in the library of Pamphilus and that contained an Origenian text. The three manuscripts, P46, B, and 1739, form a clear textual line: from P46 (early second century) to B (early fourth century) to 1739 (tenth century based on fourth century).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTextoftheNewTestament\">The Text of the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The original text of the NT is the “published” text—that is, the text as it was in its final edited form and released for circulation in the Christian community. For some books of the NT, there is little difference between the original composition and the published text. After the author wrote or dictated his work, he (or an associate) made the final editorial corrections and then released it for distribution. As is the case for books published in modern times, so in ancient times, the original writing of the author is not always the same as what is published—due to the editorial process. Nonetheless, the author is credited with the final edited text, and the published book is attributed to the author and considered the autograph. This autograph is the original published text. Of course, in this case the autographs do not exist, so scholars have to rely on copies to recover or reconstruct the original wording.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars think it is impossible to recover the original text of the Greek NT because they have not been able to reconstruct the early history of textual transmission. Other modern scholars are less pessimistic but still quite guarded in affirming the possiblity. And yet others are optimistic because we possess many early manuscripts of excellent quality and because our view of the early period of textual transmission has been getting clearer and clearer.<\/p>\n<p>When we speak of recovering the text of the NT, we are referring to individual books of the NT, not to the entire volume per se, because each book (or group of books—such as the Pauline Epistles) had its own unique history of textual transmission. The earliest extant copy of an entire NT text is the one preserved in Codex Sinaiticus (written about <span>AD<\/span> 375). (Codex Vaticanus lacks the Pastoral Epistles and Revelation.) Prior to the fourth century, the NT was circulated in its various parts: as a single book or a group of books (such as the four Gospels or the Pauline Epistles). Manuscripts from the late first century to the third century have been found with individual books such as Matthew (P1, P77), Mark (P88), Luke (P69), John (P5, 22, 52, 66), Acts (P91), Revelation (P18, 47), or containing groups of books, such as the four Gospels with Acts (P45), the Pauline Epistles (P30, P46, P92), the Petrine Epistles and Jude (P72). Each of the books of the NT has had its own textual history and has been preserved with varying degrees of accuracy. Nonetheless, all of the books were altered from the original state due to the process of manual copying decade after decade and century after century. And the text of each of the books needs to be recovered.<\/p>\n<p>The NT text was affected with many variations in its early history. In the late first and early second century, the oral traditions and the written word existed side by side with equal status—especially with respect to the material of the Gospels. Often, the text was changed by scribes attempting to conform the written message to the oral tradition or attempting to conform one Gospel account to another. By the end of the second century and into the third century, many of the significant variant readings entered into the textual stream.<\/p>\n<p>The early period of textual transmission, however, was not completely marred by textual infidelity and scribal liberty. There were those scribes who copied the text faithfully and reverently—that is, they recognized that they were copying a sacred text written by an apostle. The formalization of canonization did not ascribe this sacredness to the text. Canonization came about as the result of common, historical recognition of the sacredness of various NT books. Certain NT books, such as the four Gospels, Acts, and Paul’s epistles were considered inspired literature from the onset. As such, certain scribes copied them with reverential fidelity.<\/p>\n<p>Other scribes, however, felt free to make “improvements” in the text—either in the interest of doctrine and harmonization or due to the influence of a competitive oral tradition. The manuscripts produced in such a manner created a kind of “popular text”—i.e., an uncontrolled text. (This text type used to be called the “Western text,” but scholars now recognize this as a misnomer.)<\/p>\n<p>During the second century, there were a few men who produced recensions of the NT text. According to Eusebius, Theodotus (and his followers) altered the text for their own purposes. In the middle of the second century, Marcion expunged his copies of the Gospel according to Luke of all references to the Jewish background of Jesus, and Tatian’s harmony of the Gospels contains several textual alterations that gave support to ascetic views. And yet another recendor created the D-type text for the Gospels and Acts. This theologically minded redactor, living in the late second or third century, created a text that had short-lived popularity. Three third-century papyri, P29, P38, P48, each containing a portion from the book of Acts, may be precursors to the D-type text in Acts. But there are other papyri containing portions of Acts that provide even earlier testimony to a purer form of Acts—namely, P45 (c. 150) and P91 (c. 200), thereby showing that the D-type text of Acts did not necessarily antedate the purer form.<\/p>\n<p>Besides these endeavors—which are all noted for creating textual impurities—there was no recension of the NT text in the second century. Rather, it was a period in which there were scribes who exercised freedom in copying and those who demonstrated acumen. The manuscripts produced by the latter are those that come closest to preserving the original text. A prime example of an accurate late-second-century manuscript is P75.<\/p>\n<p>It is a well-known fact that the text produced by the scribe of P75 is a very accurate manuscript. It is also well-known that P75 was the kind of manuscript used in formulating Codex Vaticanus—the readings of P75 and B are remarkably similar. Prior to the discovery of P75, certain scholars thought Codex Vaticanus was the work of a fourth-century recension; others (chiefly Hort) thought it must trace back to a very early and accurate copy. Hort said that Codex Vaticanus preserves “not only a very ancient text, but a very pure line of a very ancient text” (Westcott and Hort, <em>The<\/em> <em>Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> pp 250–51). P75 appears to have shown that Hort was right.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the discovery of P75, many textual scholars were convinced that the second- and third-century papyri displayed a text in flux, a text characterized only by individual independence. The Chester Beatty Papyrus, P45, and the Bodmer Papyri, P66 and P72 (in 2 Peter and Jude), show this kind of independence. Scholars thought that scribes at Alexandria must have used several such texts to produce a good recension—as is exhibited in Codex Vaticanus. But we now know that Codex Vaticanus was not the result of a scholarly recension, resulting from editorial selection across the various textual histories. Rather, it is now quite clear that Codex Vaticanus was simply a copy (with some modifications) of a manuscript much like P75, not a fourth-century recension.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars may point out that this does not automatically mean that P75 and B represent the original text. What it does mean, they say, is that we have a second-century manuscript showing great affinity with a fourth-century manuscript whose quality has been highly esteemed. But various scholars have demonstrated that there was no Alexandrian recension before the time of P75 (late second century) and B (early fourth) and that both these manuscripts represent a relatively pure form of preservation of a relatively pure line of descent from the original text.<\/p>\n<p>The current view about the early text is that certain scribes in Alexandria and\/or scribes familiar with Alexandrian scriptoral practices (perhaps those in Oxyrhynchus) were probably responsible for maintaining a relatively pure text throughout the second, third, and fourth centuries. The Alexandrian scribes, associated with or actually employed by the scriptorium of the great Alexandrian library and\/or members of the scriptorium associated with the catechetical school at Alexandria (called the <em>Didaskelion<\/em>), were trained philologists, grammarians, and textual critics. Their work on the NT was not recensional—that is, it was not an organized emendation of the text. Rather, the work of purification and preservation was probably done here and there by various individuals trained in text criticism. This is apparent in the production of P66, which contains the Gospel of John. This manuscript was probably produced in an Egyptian scriptorium by a novice scribe who made many blunders, which were subsequently corrected by another scribe working in the same scriptorium. The first text produced by the novice could be classified as being very “free,” but the corrected text is far more accurate. (See the discussion on this manuscript above.)<\/p>\n<p>What appears to have happened with the copying of the NT text in the early period in Egypt has been poignantly characterized by Zuntz. He said that when a book was immensely popular (such as Homer’s <em>Iliad<\/em> and <em>Odyssey,<\/em> or Plato’s writings), it was copied with wild enthusiasm by novice and scholar alike. But when grammarians and scribes got ahold of it, they tried to rid it of textual corruption. In the process, however, they may have obliterated some authentic readings, but not many. Thus, the popular text (also known as the “Western text”) could have preserved the original wording in some cases. The popular or free kind of text is displayed in several third-century manuscripts: P9, P37, P40, P45, P72, and P78.<\/p>\n<p>In brief, this popular text is usually displayed in any kind of manuscript that was not produced by Alexandrian influences. This text, given to independence, is not as trustworthy as the Alexandrian text type. But because the Alexandrian text is known as a polished text, the popular text sometimes preserved the original wording. When a variant reading has the support of “Western” and Alexandrian texts, it is very likely original; but when the two are divided, the Alexandrian witnesses more often preserve the original wording.<\/p>\n<p>One dilemma still remains for some textual critics. They cannot explain how a P75\/B-type text coexisted with a Western-type text in the second century. All that can be said is that the Western text generally appears to be inferior to the P75\/B-type text. Of course, this kind of judgment troubles certain scholars, who point out that the esteem given to B and P75 is based on a subjective appreciation of the kind of text they contain (as over against the Western text) rather than on any kind of theoretical reconstruction of the early transmission of the text. This same subjective estimation was at work when Westcott and Hort decided that B was intrinsically superior to D (see their <em>Introduction,<\/em> pp 32–42). Yet the praxis of textual criticism time and again demonstrates that the P75\/B-type text is intrinsically superior to the Western text.<\/p>\n<p>In the final analysis, the manuscripts that represent a pure preservation of the original text are usually those called “Alexandrian.” Some scholars, such as Bruce Metzger, have called the earlier manuscripts “protoAlexandrian,” for they (or manuscripts like them) are thought of as being used to compose an Alexandrian-type text. However, this is looking at things from the perspective of the fourth century. We should look at things from the second century onward and then compare fourth-century manuscripts to those of the second. The second-century manuscripts could still be called “Alexandrian” in the sense that they were produced under Alexandrian influences. Perhaps a distinguishing terminology could be “early Alexandrian” (pre-Constantine) and “later Alexandrian” (post-Constantine). Manuscripts designated as “early Alexandrian” would generally be purer, less editorialized. Manuscripts designated “later Alexandrian” would display editorialization, as well as the influence of other textual traditions.<\/p>\n<p>The “early Alexandrian” text is reflected in many second- and third-century manuscripts. On the top of the list is P75 (c. 175), the work of a competent and careful scribe. Not far behind in quality is P4+P64+P67 (c. 150), the work of an excellent copyist. Other extremely good copies are P1 (c. 200), P20 (early third century), P23 (c. 200), P27 (third century), P28 (third century), P32 (c. 150), P39 (third century), P46 (c. 125), P65 (third century), P66 (in its corrected form—P66<span>c<\/span>; c. 150), P70 (third century), P77 (c. 150), P87 (c. 125), P90 (c. 175), and P91 (c. 200). Several of these manuscripts have been placed in the “strict” category by textual critics Kurt and Barbara Aland—that is, they exhibit “strict” scribal control and therefore are accurate copies of an exemplar, if not the original. These manuscripts are P1, P23, P35, P37, P39, P64\/67, P65, P70, and P75.<\/p>\n<p>The “later Alexandrian” text, which displays editorial polishing, is exhibited in a few manuscripts, such as א (fourth century), T (fifth century), ע (seventh century), L (eighth century), 33 (ninth century), 1739 (a tenth-century manuscript copied from a fourth-century Alexandrian manuscript much like P46), and 579 (13th century). Beginning in the fifth century, Byzantine-type manuscripts began to make their influence in Egypt. Some manuscripts dated around 400 that came from Egypt clearly reflect this influence; Codex Alexandrinus (A) is probably the best example. Other Egyptian manuscripts of this era, such as Codex Sinaiticus (א) and Codex Washingtonianus (W) display large-scale harmonization, which cannot be directly linked to any kind of recension.<\/p>\n<p>At the end of the third century, another kind of Greek text came into being and then grew in popularity until it became the dominant text-type throughout Christendom. This is the text-type first instigated by Lucian of Antioch, according to Jerome (in his introduction to his Latin translation of the Gospels). Lucian’s text was a definite recension (i.e., a purposely created edition)—as opposed to the Alexandrian text-type that came about as the result of a process wherein the Alexandrian scribes, upon comparing many manuscripts, attempted to preserve the best text—thereby serving more as textual critics than editors. Of course, the Alexandrians did do some editing—such as we would call copy-editing. The Lucianic text is the outgrowth and culmination of the popular text; it is characterized by smoothness of language, which is achieved by the removal of obscurities and awkward grammatical constructions and by the conflation of variant readings. Lucian (and\/or his associates) must have used many different kinds of manuscripts of varying qualities to produce a harmonized, edited NT text. The kind of editorial work that went into the Lucianic text is what we would call substantive editing.<\/p>\n<p>Lucian’s text was produced prior to the Diocletian persecution (c. 303), during which time many copies of the NT were confiscated and destroyed. Not long after this period of devastation, Constantine came to power and then recognized Christianity as the state religion. There was, of course, a great need for copies of the NT to be made and distributed to churches throughout the Mediterranean world. It was at this time that Lucian’s text began to be propagated by bishops going out from the Antiochan school to churches throughout the East, taking the text with them. Lucian’s text soon became the standard text of the Eastern church and formed the basis for the Byzantine text—and is thus the ultimate authority for the Textus Receptus.<\/p>\n<p>While Lucian was forming his recension of the NT text, the Alexandrian text was taking on its final shape. As was mentioned earlier, the formation of the Alexandrian text-type was the result of a process (as opposed to a single editorial recension). The formation of the Alexandrian text involved minor textual criticism (i.e., selecting variant readings among various manuscripts) and copyediting (i.e., producing a readable text). There was far less tampering with the text in the Alexandrian text-type than in the Lucian, and the underlying manuscripts for the Alexandrian text-type were superior to those used by Lucian. Perhaps Hesychius was responsible for giving the Alexandrian text its final shape, and Athanasius of Alexandria may have been the one who made this text the archetypal text for Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>As the years went by, there were fewer and fewer Alexandrian manuscripts produced, and more and more Byzantine manuscripts manufactured. Very few Egyptians continued to read Greek (with the exception of those in St Catherine’s Monastery, the site of the discovery of Codex Sinaiticus), and the rest of the Mediterranean world turned to Latin. It was only those in the Greek-speaking churches in Greece and Byzantium that continued to make copies of the Greek text. For century after century—from the 6th to the 14th—the great majority of NT manuscripts were produced in Byzantium, all bearing the same kind of text. When the first Greek NT was printed (c. 1525), it was based on a Greek text that Erasmus had compiled, using a few late Byzantine manuscripts. This printed text, with minor revisions, became the Textus Receptus.<\/p>\n<p>Beginning in the 17th century, earlier manuscripts began to be discovered—manuscripts with a text that differed from that found in the Textus Receptus. Around 1630, Codex Alexandrinus was brought to England. An early fifth-century manuscript, containing the entire NT, it provided a good, early witness to the NT text (it is an especially good witness to the original text of Revelation). Two hundred years later, a German scholar named Constantin von Tischendorf discovered Codex Sinaiticus in St Catherine’s Monastery (located near Mt Sinai). The manuscript, dated around <span>AD<\/span> 360, is one of the two oldest vellum (treated animal hide) manuscripts of the Greek NT. The earliest vellum manuscript, Codex Vaticanus, had been in the Vatican’s library since at least 1481, but it had not been made available to scholars until the middle of the 19th century. This manuscript, dated slightly earlier (<span>AD<\/span> 350) than Codex Sinaiticus, had both the OT and NT in Greek, excluding the last part of the NT (Hebrews 9:15 to Revelation 22:21 and the Pastoral Epistles). A hundred years of textual criticism has determined that this manuscript is one of the most accurate and reliable witnesses to the original text.<\/p>\n<p>Other early and important manuscripts were discovered in the 19th century. Through the tireless labors of men like Constantin von Tischendorf, Samuel Tregelles, and F. H. A. Scrivener, manuscripts such as Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, Codex Zacynthius, and Codex Augiensis were deciphered, collated, and published.<\/p>\n<p>As the various manuscripts were discovered and made public, certain scholars labored to compile a Greek text that would more closely represent the original text than did the Textus Receptus. Around 1700 John Mill produced an improved Textus Receptus, and in the 1730s Johannes Albert Bengel (known as the father of modern textual and philological studies in the NT) published a text that deviated from the Textus Receptus according to the evidence of earlier manuscripts.<\/p>\n<p>In the 1800s certain scholars began to abandon the Textus Receptus. Karl Lachman, a classical philologist, produced a fresh text (in 1831) that represented the fourth-century manuscripts. Samuel Tregelles (self-taught in Latin, Hebrew, and Greek), laboring throughout his entire lifetime, concentrated all of his efforts in publishing one Greek text (which came out in six parts, from 1857 to 1872). As is stated in the introduction to this work, Tregelles’s goal was “to exhibit the text of the NT in the very words in which it has been transmitted on the evidence of ancient authority.” Henry Alford also compiled a Greek text based upon the best and earliest manuscripts. In his preface to <em>The Greek New Testament<\/em> (a multivolume commentary on the Greek NT, published in 1849), Alford said he labored for the “demolition of the unworthy and pedantic reverence for the received text, which stood in the way of all chance of discovering the genuine word of God.”<\/p>\n<p>During this same era, Tischendorf was devoting a lifetime of labor to discovering manuscripts and producing accurate editions of the Greek NT. In a letter to his fiancé he wrote, “I am confronted with a sacred task, the struggle to regain the original form of the NT.” In fulfillment of his desire, he discovered Codex Sinaiticus, deciphered the palimpsest Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, collated countless manuscripts, and produced several editions of the Greek NT (the eighth edition is considered the best).<\/p>\n<p>Aided by the work of the previous scholars, two British men, Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort, worked together for 28 years to produce a volume entitled <em>The New Testament in the Original Greek<\/em> (1881). Along with this publication, they made known their theory (which was chiefly Hort’s) that Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus (along with a few other early manuscripts) represented a text that most closely replicated the original writing. They called this text the Neutral Text. (According to their studies, the Neutral Text described certain manuscripts that had the least amount of textual corruption.) This is the text that Westcott and Hort relied upon for compiling their volume.<\/p>\n<p>The 19th century was a fruitful era for the recovery of the Greek NT; the 20th century, no less so. Those living in the 20th century have witnessed the discovery of the Oxyrhynchus Papyri, the Chester Beatty Papyri, and the Bodmer Papyri. To date, there are nearly 100 papyri containing portions of the NT—several of which date from the late first century to the early fourth century. These significant discoveries, providing scholars with many ancient manuscripts, have greatly enhanced the effort to recover the original wording of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>At the beginning of the 20th century, Eberhard Nestle used the best editions of the Greek NT produced in the 19th century to compile a text that represented the majority consensus. The work of making new editions was carried on by his son for several years, and then came under the care of Kurt Aland. The latest edition (the 27th) of Nestle-Aland’s <em>Novum Testamentum Graece<\/em> appeared in 1993. The same Greek text appears in another popular volume published by the United Bible Societies, called the <em>Greek New Testament<\/em> (fourth edition). Aland has argued that the Nestle-Aland text, 27th edition (NA<span>27<\/span>), comes closer to the original text of the NT than did Tischendorf or Westcott and Hort. And in several writings he intimates that NA<span>27<\/span> may very well be the original text. Though few, if any, scholars would agree with this, the 27th edition of the Nestle-Aland text is regarded by many as representing the latest and best in textual scholarship.<\/p>\n<h5>New Testament Textual Criticism<\/h5>\n<p>Textual critics working with ancient literature universally acknowledge the supremacy of earlier manuscripts over later ones. Textual critics not working with the NT would love to have the same kind of early witnesses that biblical scholars possess. In fact, many of them work with manuscripts written 1,000 years after the autographs were composed! We all marvel that the Dead Sea Scrolls have provided a text that is nearly 800 years closer to the originals than the Masoretic manuscripts, and yet many of the Dead Sea manuscripts are still over 600 to 800 years removed from the time of original composition. NT textual critics have a great advantage!<\/p>\n<p>The 19th-century NT textual scholars—such as Lachmann, Tregelles, Tischendorf, Westcott and Hort—worked on the basis that the earliest witnesses are the best witnesses. Some textual scholars have continued this line of recovery using the testimony of the earlier witnesses. But many textual scholars since the time of Westcott and Hort have been less inclined to produce editions based on the theory that the earliest reading is the best. Most present-day textual critics are more inclined to endorse the maxim: the reading that is most likely original is the one that best explains the variants.<\/p>\n<p>This maxim (or “canon” as it is sometimes called), as good as it is, produces conflicting results. For example, two scholars, using this same principle to examine the same variant unit, will not agree. One will argue that one variant was produced by a copyist attempting to emulate the author’s style; the other will claim the same variant has to be original because it accords with the author’s style. One will argue that one variant was produced by an orthodox scribe attempting to rid the text of a reading that could be used to promote heterodoxy or heresy; another will claim that the same variant has to be original because it is orthodox and accords with Christian doctrine (thus a heterodox or heretical scribe must have changed it). Furthermore, this principle allows for the possibility that the reading selected for the text can be taken from any manuscript of any date. This can lead to subjective eclecticism.<\/p>\n<p>Modern textual scholars have attempted to temper the subjectivism by employing a method called “reasoned eclecticism.” This kind of eclecticism applies a combination of internal and external considerations, whereby the character of the variants is evaluated in light of the manuscripts’ evidence and vice versa. This is supposed to produce a balanced view and serve as a check against purely subjective tendencies.<\/p>\n<p>The Alands favor the same kind of approach, calling it the local-genealogical method, which is defined as follows:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>It is impossible to proceed from the assumption of a manuscript stemma, and on the basis of a full review and analysis of the relationships obtaining among the variety of interrelated branches in the manuscript tradition, to undertake a recension of the data as one would do with other Greek texts. Decisions must be made one by one, instance by instance. This method has been characterized as eclecticism, but wrongly so. After carefully establishing the variety of readings offered in a passage and the possibilities of their interpretation, it must always then be determined afresh on the basis of external and internal criteria which of these readings (and frequently they are quite numerous) is the original, from which the others may be regarded as derivative. From the perspective of our present knowledge, this “local-genealogical” method (if it must be given a name) is the only one which meets the requirements of the NT textual tradition. (Introduction to <em>Novum Testamentum Graece,<\/em> 26th edition)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>The “local-genealogical” method assumes that for any given variation unit any manuscript (or manuscripts) may have preserved the original text. Applying this method produces an extremely uneven documentary presentation of the text. Anyone studying the critical apparatus of NA<span>27<\/span> will detect that there is not an even documentary presentation. The eclecticism is dispersed throughout the text.<\/p>\n<p>“Reasoned eclecticism” and\/or the “local-genealogical” method tend to give priority to internal evidence over external evidence. But it has to be the other way around if we are going to recover the original text. This was Westcott and Hort’s opinion. With respect to their compilation of <em>The New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> Hort wrote, “Documentary evidence has been in most cases allowed to confer the place of honour against internal evidence” (<em>The Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> p 17).<\/p>\n<p>In this respect, Westcott and Hort need to be revived. Earnest Colwell was of the same mind when he wrote “Hort Redivivus: A Plea and a Program.” Colwell decried the growing tendency to rely entirely on the internal evidence of readings, without serious consideration of documentary evidence. He called upon scholars to make an attempt to reconstruct a history of the manuscript tradition. The abundance of manuscripts—several of which are very early—will aid scholars in this ongoing task.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BIBLE*, Manuscripts and Text of the (New Testament) Copies of the NT books produced by scribes and editions made from these copies. In the centuries prior to the simultaneous-multiple production of copies via dictation (wherein many scribes in a scriptorium transcribed a text dictated to them by one reader), all manuscript copies were made singly—each scribe producing a copy from an exemplar. Prior to the 15th century, when Johannes Gutenberg invented movable type for the printing press, all ...","summary_en":"BIBLE*, Manuscripts and Text of the (New Testament) Copies of the NT books produced by scribes and editions made from these copies. In the centuries prior to the simultaneous-multiple production of copies via dictation (wherein many scribes in a scriptorium transcribed a text dictated to them by one reader), all manuscript copies were made singly—each scribe producing a copy from an exemplar. Prior to the 15th century, when Johannes Gutenberg invented movable type for the printing press, all ...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":6178,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Cerinthus*","title_en":"Cerinthus*","content_ro":"<h3>CERINTHUS*<\/h3>\n<p>Gnostic heretic (died c. 100) whose heresy was condemned by the apostle John. Probably born in Egypt and reared a Jew, Cerinthus was leader of a group of Christians who had Gnostic tendencies. He apparently believed that the world was created not by God but by a lesser being (called the Demiurge) or by angels, one of whom gave the law to the Jews. Cerinthus also taught that Jesus was an ordinary man, upon whom “the Christ” descended at his baptism. This divine power revealed the transcendent and unknown God. This “Christ” abandoned Jesus before his crucifixion.<\/p>\n<p>The church father Eusebius (c. 260–340) quotes a story from Irenaeus (who lived in the late second century), who heard it from Polycarp (a disciple of the apostle John). The story says that John heard that Cerinthus had come into an Ephesian bathhouse where he (John) was. John immediately rushed out of the bathhouse shouting, “The building will collapse because the enemy of truth is inside!” Some scholars believe that certain passages in John’s writings may have been directed against Cerinthus (see Jn 1:1-3, 14; 1 Jn 4:1-3).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CERINTHUS*<\/h3>\n<p>Gnostic heretic (died c. 100) whose heresy was condemned by the apostle John. Probably born in Egypt and reared a Jew, Cerinthus was leader of a group of Christians who had Gnostic tendencies. He apparently believed that the world was created not by God but by a lesser being (called the Demiurge) or by angels, one of whom gave the law to the Jews. Cerinthus also taught that Jesus was an ordinary man, upon whom “the Christ” descended at his baptism. This divine power revealed the transcendent and unknown God. This “Christ” abandoned Jesus before his crucifixion.<\/p>\n<p>The church father Eusebius (c. 260–340) quotes a story from Irenaeus (who lived in the late second century), who heard it from Polycarp (a disciple of the apostle John). The story says that John heard that Cerinthus had come into an Ephesian bathhouse where he (John) was. John immediately rushed out of the bathhouse shouting, “The building will collapse because the enemy of truth is inside!” Some scholars believe that certain passages in John’s writings may have been directed against Cerinthus (see Jn 1:1-3, 14; 1 Jn 4:1-3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"CERINTHUS* Gnostic heretic (died c. 100) whose heresy was condemned by the apostle John. Probably born in Egypt and reared a Jew, Cerinthus was leader of a group of Christians who had Gnostic tendencies. He apparently believed that the world was created not by God but by a lesser being (called the Demiurge) or by angels, one of whom gave the law to the Jews. Cerinthus also taught that Jesus was an ordinary man, upon whom “the Christ” descended at his baptism. This divine power revealed the tr...","summary_en":"CERINTHUS* Gnostic heretic (died c. 100) whose heresy was condemned by the apostle John. Probably born in Egypt and reared a Jew, Cerinthus was leader of a group of Christians who had Gnostic tendencies. He apparently believed that the world was created not by God but by a lesser being (called the Demiurge) or by angels, one of whom gave the law to the Jews. Cerinthus also taught that Jesus was an ordinary man, upon whom “the Christ” descended at his baptism. This divine power revealed the tr...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":8032,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Creation","title_en":"Creation","content_ro":"<h3>CREATION<\/h3>\n<p>The divine act of making something out of nothing; the divine act of bringing the world into ordered existence. Human beings unaided by divine revelation cannot arrive at the biblical doctrine of Creation by theological, philosophical, or scientific speculation. According to the Bible, knowledge of Creation must come by God’s revelation (cf. Heb 11:3).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Understanding Creation<\/p>\n<p>• Creation and Theology<\/p>\n<p>• Creation and Science<\/p>\n<p>• The Issues Surrounding Evolution<\/p>\n<p>Creation, Science, and Morality<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"UnderstandingCreation\">Understanding Creation<\/p>\n<p>To start a discussion about Creation with a comparison of the Genesis record and modern science is to begin at the wrong place. One should first ask what the Creation account would have meant to a Hebrew person in Bible times; then one should ask what use the prophets of Israel made of the doctrine of Creation. The following are some points to be noted.<\/p>\n<p>1. Creation was a conquering of chaos. Most creation accounts from the ancient world began with a primeval chaos. The God who could conquer chaos was understood as the true and living God. Genesis 1 is a magnificent account of how the God of Israel brought the chaos of Genesis 1:2 into an ordered cosmos.<\/p>\n<li>2. Creation was prompted by God’s good will. It was the free act of God. It is good (Gn 1:4, 10, 12, 18, 21, 25, 31). On the basis of that fact, Christians assert that life is a gift of God. The Christian affirmation stands against all the nihilisms and pessimisms found in religious and philosophical history.<\/li>\n<li>3. Creation is under the shadow of sin (Rom 8:18-25). Scripture teaches that creation today is not seen in its original pristine purity but rather is seen as a world with a large measure of ambiguity.<\/li>\n<li>4. Creation is dependent upon God. The relationship of God to his creation is set out in Ephesians 4:6. God is above all; that is, he is transcendent. God is through all; that is, he works in all things. God is in all; that is, he is divinely present or immanent in the entire creation (Ps 90:1-4; cf. Jn 1:3; 1 Cor 8:6; Col 1:16-17).<\/li>\n<li>5. Creation is by the word of God (Gn 1; Heb 11:3). Students of literature have said that the creation of the world by the “word of God” is one of the most sublime of all human thoughts. Among other things it means creation by a Person. The vast expanse of the universe and the enormous number of stars and galaxies can numb a thoughtful person into a sense of meaninglessness. But when one knows that it was all created by the word of God, one knows that a Person is behind the frigid mask of the stellar spaces (Pss 8; 19; Rom 1:20).<\/li>\n<li>6. Creation as depicted in the Bible stands up to critical examination. Scholars have studied parallel accounts of other peoples of biblical times, and none of them has the majesty and theological purity of the Genesis account.<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CreationandTheology\">Creation and Theology<\/p>\n<p>The doctrine of Creation is built on the sum of all the biblical teachings on Creation. Examination of that material leads to a number of conclusions.<\/p>\n<p>1. The doctrine of Creation gives us our fundamental understanding of humanity. Men and women are in the image of God (Gn 1:26-27). That means, at least, that a human being is more than an animal, even though both were created from the dust of the earth and have much in common. Many conjectures have been made about the positive meaning of the expression “image of God.” If there is a common denominator, it is that human beings find their meaning, their destiny, and their worth in their special relationship to God.<\/p>\n<li>2. Parallel to the statement of humanity’s relationship to God is the affirmation that humanity is to be lord of God’s creation. Again, human beings are separated from the animal world, and their responsibility before God is specified (Gn 1:28; 2:15; Ps 8).<\/li>\n<li>3. Both male and female are in the image of God. That means that the divine image is borne equally by both sexes. It also means that sexuality in human beings has many more dimensions than sexuality among animals. The sexual life of human beings is therefore vastly richer than that of animals and subject to deeper corruption (Mk 10:2-9; 1 Cor 7:1-5; Eph 5:25-31; cf. Heb 13:4).<\/li>\n<li>4. The doctrine of prayer as “asking and receiving” is grounded in the providence of God, which in turn is grounded in Creation. There is meaning in petitionary prayer only if there is a sovereign Creator who can answer the petitions of his own creatures (Mt 6:5-13; Col 4:2; 1 Pt 5:6-7; Rv 8:3).<\/li>\n<li>5. The history of humanity and of Israel begins with Genesis 1. Creation begins history; it is not merely the premise of history. The God of Creation is the God of Abraham, of Moses, of the prophets, and of Jesus Christ.<\/li>\n<li>6. Creation is a witness to the existence and nature of God (Ps 19; Rom 1:18-19). In theology the expression used is “general revelation.” “General” means that it is a revelation witnessed by all people.<\/li>\n<li>7. Creation is a total creation. The Genesis account mentions certain bodies in the skies, certain creatures in the seas, certain plant and animal life on the earth. The number of species runs into the millions. Genesis does not attempt to list them but merely suggests such a list. God has made all that there is (cf. Jn 1:1-2). Therefore, there is never a threat to the believer in the Lord from any part of the universe. There is only one Lord, not many gods and lords, to whom all are called in obedience. The personal meaning is found in Romans 8:38-39, where the apostle Paul searches the entire universe and can find nothing in it, anywhere or at any time, that can separate a believer from the love of God in Christ.<\/li>\n<li>8. The chief theological use of the doctrine of Creation in the OT is to label idolatry for the sin that it is. Idolatry is the primeval lie and it leads to immorality, making a lie of one’s life.<\/li>\n<li>9. One of the remarkable doctrines of the NT is the “cosmic Christ”—which means he is the Creator and Sustainer of the universe (Jn 1:1-2; Col 1:16-17; Heb 1:3). The purpose of linking Christ with Creation is to show that he is more than a first-century Jew from Palestine.<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CreationandScience\">Creation and Science<\/p>\n<p>Does science prove Creation? Some scientists have thought that the innumerable conditions necessary for life, which do as a matter of fact exist on the earth, is such a proof. That argument has been called “cosmic theology.”<\/p>\n<p>Another so-called proof of Creation from science is the “big bang” theory of the origin of the universe. Although that view has forged ahead of its competitors, it is a theory of “first states” and not of the absolute origin of all things. The Christian doctrine of creation from nothing (Latin, <em>ex nihilo<\/em>) means more than that: it means that the absolute origin, sustaining, and meaning of all things is in the living Lord of Israel and of the church.<\/p>\n<p>Another argument comes from the second law of thermodynamics and the concept of entropy. (Entropy refers to the leveling off of energy or temperature to a state in which no energy is available.) Heat systems cool off. The universe is not infinitely old or it would now be cool. Since there are still stars and suns, the universe must have been created a finite time ago. A related argument is that it was necessary to create a universe that would run down. In so running down, it supplies heat to the earth so that the drama of God and man could unfold.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIssuesSurroundingEvolution\">The Issues Surrounding Evolution<\/p>\n<p>When Charles Darwin proposed biological evolution in the middle of the 19th century, many evangelical Christians took exception to it. They objected even more strenuously when books were written about human evolution. Two famous debates resulted from that controversy. In England the issue was debated in 1860 before the British Association at Oxford. That debate pitted Bishop Samuel Wilberforce (against the theory) against T. H. Huxley (for the theory). Although there was no formal decision, sentiment was with Huxley. The second debate was the famous Scopes trial in Dayton, Tennessee, in 1925. William Jennings Bryan defended the law that said that John T. Scopes should be found guilty of teaching evolution in the classroom. Clarence Darrow defended Scopes. Again, the sentiment was with the proponent of evolution, Darrow (although Bryan gave a sturdier defense of his beliefs than is generally acknowledged).<\/p>\n<p>Both orthodox Roman Catholics and evangelical Protestants have taken various views of the controversy, of which only a few can be mentioned.<\/p>\n<p>1. Some argue that evolution is contrary to the teachings of Scripture and is—in the name of science—actually the supreme defiance of Scripture’s authority. Thus, no quarter must ever be given in the battle against evolution.<\/p>\n<li>2. Others find a satisfactory resolution in “theistic evolution”—that is, God began the evolutionary process.<\/li>\n<li>3. Many see the parallels between the order of fossil-bearing strata in the so-called “geological column” and the six days of Creation as too close to be accidental. For them there is essential harmony between “Genesis and geology.”<\/li>\n<li>4. Many regard evolution as a theory like all other theories, which will be made or broken in the laboratory or in fieldwork. They see the doctrine of Creation as neither for nor against evolution. It is on a different level of explanation: “Science tells how; Scripture tells why.”<\/li>\n<li>5. Jesuit paleontologist Teilhard de Chardin attempted to save Christianity from evolution by “christifying” the whole evolutionary process.<\/li>\n<li>6. British author C. S. Lewis, among others, distinguished evolution from what might be called “evolutionism.” Lewis said that the validity of evolution as a narrow scientific thesis is for scientists to decide. But the notion of a total, all-encompassing evolutionary myth, as a human pseudodoctrine of Creation, is clearly not scientific.<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CreationScienceandMorality\">Creation, Science, and Morality<\/p>\n<p>The growth of world population and the spread of industrialization have produced the problem of local and worldwide pollution. The ecological crisis has been said by some scholars to be the fault of Christian faith, which inspired man—as the “lord of creation”—to exploit creation. But that is hardly the meaning of Genesis 1:28, which is an injunction to responsibility. A number of OT texts show clearly that the concern of Scripture is for human responsibility in God’s world; hence, Scripture parallels modern ecological concerns.<\/p>\n<p>Science stretches theological understanding by continually revising our knowledge of the universe, but the biblical doctrine of Creation does not retreat as science advances. For the Christian, the world studied by scientists and pondered by philosophers remains God’s created world.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Creation Myths; God, Being and Attributes of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CREATION<\/h3>\n<p>The divine act of making something out of nothing; the divine act of bringing the world into ordered existence. Human beings unaided by divine revelation cannot arrive at the biblical doctrine of Creation by theological, philosophical, or scientific speculation. According to the Bible, knowledge of Creation must come by God’s revelation (cf. Heb 11:3).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Understanding Creation<\/p>\n<p>• Creation and Theology<\/p>\n<p>• Creation and Science<\/p>\n<p>• The Issues Surrounding Evolution<\/p>\n<p>Creation, Science, and Morality<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"UnderstandingCreation\">Understanding Creation<\/p>\n<p>To start a discussion about Creation with a comparison of the Genesis record and modern science is to begin at the wrong place. One should first ask what the Creation account would have meant to a Hebrew person in Bible times; then one should ask what use the prophets of Israel made of the doctrine of Creation. The following are some points to be noted.<\/p>\n<p>1. Creation was a conquering of chaos. Most creation accounts from the ancient world began with a primeval chaos. The God who could conquer chaos was understood as the true and living God. Genesis 1 is a magnificent account of how the God of Israel brought the chaos of Genesis 1:2 into an ordered cosmos.<\/p>\n<li>2. Creation was prompted by God’s good will. It was the free act of God. It is good (Gn 1:4, 10, 12, 18, 21, 25, 31). On the basis of that fact, Christians assert that life is a gift of God. The Christian affirmation stands against all the nihilisms and pessimisms found in religious and philosophical history.<\/li>\n<li>3. Creation is under the shadow of sin (Rom 8:18-25). Scripture teaches that creation today is not seen in its original pristine purity but rather is seen as a world with a large measure of ambiguity.<\/li>\n<li>4. Creation is dependent upon God. The relationship of God to his creation is set out in Ephesians 4:6. God is above all; that is, he is transcendent. God is through all; that is, he works in all things. God is in all; that is, he is divinely present or immanent in the entire creation (Ps 90:1-4; cf. Jn 1:3; 1 Cor 8:6; Col 1:16-17).<\/li>\n<li>5. Creation is by the word of God (Gn 1; Heb 11:3). Students of literature have said that the creation of the world by the “word of God” is one of the most sublime of all human thoughts. Among other things it means creation by a Person. The vast expanse of the universe and the enormous number of stars and galaxies can numb a thoughtful person into a sense of meaninglessness. But when one knows that it was all created by the word of God, one knows that a Person is behind the frigid mask of the stellar spaces (Pss 8; 19; Rom 1:20).<\/li>\n<li>6. Creation as depicted in the Bible stands up to critical examination. Scholars have studied parallel accounts of other peoples of biblical times, and none of them has the majesty and theological purity of the Genesis account.<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CreationandTheology\">Creation and Theology<\/p>\n<p>The doctrine of Creation is built on the sum of all the biblical teachings on Creation. Examination of that material leads to a number of conclusions.<\/p>\n<p>1. The doctrine of Creation gives us our fundamental understanding of humanity. Men and women are in the image of God (Gn 1:26-27). That means, at least, that a human being is more than an animal, even though both were created from the dust of the earth and have much in common. Many conjectures have been made about the positive meaning of the expression “image of God.” If there is a common denominator, it is that human beings find their meaning, their destiny, and their worth in their special relationship to God.<\/p>\n<li>2. Parallel to the statement of humanity’s relationship to God is the affirmation that humanity is to be lord of God’s creation. Again, human beings are separated from the animal world, and their responsibility before God is specified (Gn 1:28; 2:15; Ps 8).<\/li>\n<li>3. Both male and female are in the image of God. That means that the divine image is borne equally by both sexes. It also means that sexuality in human beings has many more dimensions than sexuality among animals. The sexual life of human beings is therefore vastly richer than that of animals and subject to deeper corruption (Mk 10:2-9; 1 Cor 7:1-5; Eph 5:25-31; cf. Heb 13:4).<\/li>\n<li>4. The doctrine of prayer as “asking and receiving” is grounded in the providence of God, which in turn is grounded in Creation. There is meaning in petitionary prayer only if there is a sovereign Creator who can answer the petitions of his own creatures (Mt 6:5-13; Col 4:2; 1 Pt 5:6-7; Rv 8:3).<\/li>\n<li>5. The history of humanity and of Israel begins with Genesis 1. Creation begins history; it is not merely the premise of history. The God of Creation is the God of Abraham, of Moses, of the prophets, and of Jesus Christ.<\/li>\n<li>6. Creation is a witness to the existence and nature of God (Ps 19; Rom 1:18-19). In theology the expression used is “general revelation.” “General” means that it is a revelation witnessed by all people.<\/li>\n<li>7. Creation is a total creation. The Genesis account mentions certain bodies in the skies, certain creatures in the seas, certain plant and animal life on the earth. The number of species runs into the millions. Genesis does not attempt to list them but merely suggests such a list. God has made all that there is (cf. Jn 1:1-2). Therefore, there is never a threat to the believer in the Lord from any part of the universe. There is only one Lord, not many gods and lords, to whom all are called in obedience. The personal meaning is found in Romans 8:38-39, where the apostle Paul searches the entire universe and can find nothing in it, anywhere or at any time, that can separate a believer from the love of God in Christ.<\/li>\n<li>8. The chief theological use of the doctrine of Creation in the OT is to label idolatry for the sin that it is. Idolatry is the primeval lie and it leads to immorality, making a lie of one’s life.<\/li>\n<li>9. One of the remarkable doctrines of the NT is the “cosmic Christ”—which means he is the Creator and Sustainer of the universe (Jn 1:1-2; Col 1:16-17; Heb 1:3). The purpose of linking Christ with Creation is to show that he is more than a first-century Jew from Palestine.<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CreationandScience\">Creation and Science<\/p>\n<p>Does science prove Creation? Some scientists have thought that the innumerable conditions necessary for life, which do as a matter of fact exist on the earth, is such a proof. That argument has been called “cosmic theology.”<\/p>\n<p>Another so-called proof of Creation from science is the “big bang” theory of the origin of the universe. Although that view has forged ahead of its competitors, it is a theory of “first states” and not of the absolute origin of all things. The Christian doctrine of creation from nothing (Latin, <em>ex nihilo<\/em>) means more than that: it means that the absolute origin, sustaining, and meaning of all things is in the living Lord of Israel and of the church.<\/p>\n<p>Another argument comes from the second law of thermodynamics and the concept of entropy. (Entropy refers to the leveling off of energy or temperature to a state in which no energy is available.) Heat systems cool off. The universe is not infinitely old or it would now be cool. Since there are still stars and suns, the universe must have been created a finite time ago. A related argument is that it was necessary to create a universe that would run down. In so running down, it supplies heat to the earth so that the drama of God and man could unfold.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIssuesSurroundingEvolution\">The Issues Surrounding Evolution<\/p>\n<p>When Charles Darwin proposed biological evolution in the middle of the 19th century, many evangelical Christians took exception to it. They objected even more strenuously when books were written about human evolution. Two famous debates resulted from that controversy. In England the issue was debated in 1860 before the British Association at Oxford. That debate pitted Bishop Samuel Wilberforce (against the theory) against T. H. Huxley (for the theory). Although there was no formal decision, sentiment was with Huxley. The second debate was the famous Scopes trial in Dayton, Tennessee, in 1925. William Jennings Bryan defended the law that said that John T. Scopes should be found guilty of teaching evolution in the classroom. Clarence Darrow defended Scopes. Again, the sentiment was with the proponent of evolution, Darrow (although Bryan gave a sturdier defense of his beliefs than is generally acknowledged).<\/p>\n<p>Both orthodox Roman Catholics and evangelical Protestants have taken various views of the controversy, of which only a few can be mentioned.<\/p>\n<p>1. Some argue that evolution is contrary to the teachings of Scripture and is—in the name of science—actually the supreme defiance of Scripture’s authority. Thus, no quarter must ever be given in the battle against evolution.<\/p>\n<li>2. Others find a satisfactory resolution in “theistic evolution”—that is, God began the evolutionary process.<\/li>\n<li>3. Many see the parallels between the order of fossil-bearing strata in the so-called “geological column” and the six days of Creation as too close to be accidental. For them there is essential harmony between “Genesis and geology.”<\/li>\n<li>4. Many regard evolution as a theory like all other theories, which will be made or broken in the laboratory or in fieldwork. They see the doctrine of Creation as neither for nor against evolution. It is on a different level of explanation: “Science tells how; Scripture tells why.”<\/li>\n<li>5. Jesuit paleontologist Teilhard de Chardin attempted to save Christianity from evolution by “christifying” the whole evolutionary process.<\/li>\n<li>6. British author C. S. Lewis, among others, distinguished evolution from what might be called “evolutionism.” Lewis said that the validity of evolution as a narrow scientific thesis is for scientists to decide. But the notion of a total, all-encompassing evolutionary myth, as a human pseudodoctrine of Creation, is clearly not scientific.<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CreationScienceandMorality\">Creation, Science, and Morality<\/p>\n<p>The growth of world population and the spread of industrialization have produced the problem of local and worldwide pollution. The ecological crisis has been said by some scholars to be the fault of Christian faith, which inspired man—as the “lord of creation”—to exploit creation. But that is hardly the meaning of Genesis 1:28, which is an injunction to responsibility. A number of OT texts show clearly that the concern of Scripture is for human responsibility in God’s world; hence, Scripture parallels modern ecological concerns.<\/p>\n<p>Science stretches theological understanding by continually revising our knowledge of the universe, but the biblical doctrine of Creation does not retreat as science advances. For the Christian, the world studied by scientists and pondered by philosophers remains God’s created world.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Creation Myths; God, Being and Attributes of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CREATION The divine act of making something out of nothing; the divine act of bringing the world into ordered existence. Human beings unaided by divine revelation cannot arrive at the biblical doctrine of Creation by theological, philosophical, or scientific speculation. According to the Bible, knowledge of Creation must come by God’s revelation (cf. Heb 11:3). Preview • Understanding Creation • Creation and Theology • Creation and Science • The Issues Surrounding Evolution Creation, Science,...","summary_en":"CREATION The divine act of making something out of nothing; the divine act of bringing the world into ordered existence. Human beings unaided by divine revelation cannot arrive at the biblical doctrine of Creation by theological, philosophical, or scientific speculation. According to the Bible, knowledge of Creation must come by God’s revelation (cf. Heb 11:3). Preview • Understanding Creation • Creation and Theology • Creation and Science • The Issues Surrounding Evolution Creation, Science,...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":14826,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Greek Language","title_en":"Greek Language","content_ro":"<h3>GREEK LANGUAGE<\/h3>\n<p>Language of the Greek people.<\/p>\n<p>The Greek language is a beautiful, rich, and well-tuned instrument of communication. It is a fitting tool both for vigorous thought and for religious devotion. During its classical period, Greek was the language of one of the world’s greatest cultures. During that cultural period, language, literature, and art flourished more than war. The Greek mind was preoccupied with ideals of beauty. The Greek language reflected artistry in its philosophical dialogues, its poetry, and its stately orations.<\/p>\n<p>The Greek language was also characterized by strength and vigor. It was capable of variety and striking effects. Greek was a language of argument, with a vocabulary and style that could penetrate and clarify phenomena rather than simply tell stories. Classical Greek elaborately developed many forms from a few word roots. Its complex syntax allowed intricate word arrangements to express fine nuances of meaning.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AncientHistory\">Ancient History<\/p>\n<p>Although the antecedents of Greek are obscure, the first traces of what could be called antecedents of ancient Greek appear in Mycenaean and Minoan documents (1400–1200 <span>BC<\/span>) that use three different scripts: Minoan hieroglyphic (the earliest), linear A, and linear B (the latest). Linear B, generally considered “pre-Greek,” is written in a syllabic script found on clay tablets discovered on the island of Crete and on the Greek mainland.<\/p>\n<p>The Mycenaean civilization and script ended suddenly with the Dorian invasions (1200 <span>BC<\/span>), and writing seems to have disappeared for several centuries. Later, about the eighth century <span>BC<\/span>, Greek writing appeared in a different script. That script was based on an alphabet presumably borrowed from the Phoenicians and then adapted to the Greek speech sound system and direction of writing. Greek was first written from right to left, like the West Semitic languages, then in a back-and-forth pattern, finally from left to right. Several dialects appeared during the archaic period (8th to 6th centuries <span>BC<\/span>): Dorian, Eonian, Achaean, and Aeolic.<\/p>\n<p>During the classical period (5th to 4th centuries <span>BC<\/span>), Greek culture reached its literary and artistic zenith. Classical (or Attic) Greek was characterized by subtlety of syntax and an expressive use of particles (short, uninflected parts of speech, often untranslatable). As the city of Athens attained cultural and political control, the Attic dialect also gained in prestige. With the Macedonian conquests, Attic Greek, combined with influences from other dialects (especially Ionic), became the international language of the eastern Mediterranean area.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HellenismandtheKoineDialect\">Hellenism and the Koine Dialect<\/p>\n<p>The conquests of Alexander the Great encouraged the spread of Greek language and culture. Regional dialects were largely replaced by “Hellenistic” or “koine” (common) Greek. Koine Greek is a dialect preserved and known through thousands of inscriptions reflecting all aspects of daily life. The koine dialect added many vernacular expressions to Attic Greek, thus making it more cosmopolitan. Simplifying the grammar also better adapted it to a worldwide culture. The new language, reflecting simple, popular speech, became the common language of commerce and diplomacy. The Greek language lost much of its elegance and finely shaded nuance as a result of its evolution from classic to koine. Nevertheless, it retained its distinguishing characteristics of strength, beauty, clarity, and logical rhetorical power.<\/p>\n<p>It is significant that the apostle Paul wrote his letter to Christians in Rome in the Greek language rather than in Latin. The Roman Empire of that time was culturally a Greek world, except for governmental transactions.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheSeptuagint\">The Septuagint<\/p>\n<p>During the centuries immediately before Christ, the eastern Mediterranean had been undergoing not only Hellenization but also Semitization. Both influences can be observed in the Greek translation of the OT.<\/p>\n<p>Translation of the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek was an epochal event. The Septuagint (the earliest Greek translation of the OT) later had a strong influence on Christian thought. A necessary consequence of Hebrew writers using the Greek language was that a Greek spirit and Greek forms of thought influenced Jewish culture. The Jews soon appropriated from the rich and refined Greek vocabulary some expressions for ideas that were beyond the scope of Hebrew terminology. Also, old Greek expressions acquired new and extended meanings in this translation of the OT by Greek-speaking Jews.<\/p>\n<p>The Greek OT has been very significant in the development of Christian thought. Often the usage of a Greek word in the Septuagint provides a key to its meaning in the NT. The OT dialect of “Jewish Greek” is at times seen in NT passages translated very literally; at other times, the NT translation of OT texts is very loose.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentGreek\">New Testament Greek<\/p>\n<p>Although most NT authors were Jewish, they wrote in Greek, the universal language of their time. In addition, the apostle John seems to have been acquainted with some Greek philosophy, which influenced his style. John used “word” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span>) in reference to Christ (Jn 1:1), and several other abstract expressions. John may have been influenced by the Egyptian center of Alexandria, where Greek philosophy and Hebrew learning had merged in a unique way.<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul also was acquainted with Greek authors (Acts 17:28; 1 Cor 15:33; Ti 1:12). Thus, Greek orators and philosophers influenced Paul’s language as well as Hebrew prophets and scholars.<\/p>\n<p>Exactly which dialect of Hebrew or Aramaic Jesus spoke is debated. It is certainly possible that Jesus also spoke Greek. The fact remains that the Gospels were originally written as Greek texts. The records in Greek of Jesus’ teachings and accomplishments prepared the way for the gospel to spread throughout a Greek-speaking culture.<\/p>\n<p>The dignity and restraint of koine Greek used by Christian writers was neither so artificial and pedantic as some classical writings nor so trivial and vulgar as spoken koine.<\/p>\n<p>Greek words took on richer, more spiritual meaning in the context of Scripture. Influenced by the simplicity and rich vividness of Semitic style, the NT was not written in a peculiar “Holy Ghost” language (as some medieval scholars believed) but in koine (common) Greek, largely by Semitic-thinking authors. Tens of thousands of papyri unearthed in Egypt in the early 20th century furnish lexical and grammatical parallels to biblical language, revealing that it was part of the linguistic warp and woof of that era. Yet NT Greek was nevertheless “free,” often creating its own idiom. Christian writers influenced Greek thought by introducing new expressions in order to convey their message about Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>Semitic Influence<\/h5>\n<p>Because NT Greek combines the directness of Hebrew thought with the precision of Greek expression, Greek’s subtle delicacy often interprets Hebrew concepts. The Semitic influence is strongest in the Gospels, the book of Revelation, and the Letter of James. Books like Luke and Hebrews exhibit a more typically Greek style. The NT epistles blend the wisdom of Hebrew and the dialectic philosophy of Greek. Sermons recorded in the NT combine the Hebrew prophetic message with Greek oratorical force.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to direct quotes and allusions from the Septuagint, a pervasive Semitic influence on NT Greek has been noted in many areas. For example, the syntax of NT Greek contains many examples of Semitic style.<\/p>\n<h5>Vocabulary<\/h5>\n<p>The Greek NT vocabulary is abundant and sufficient to convey just the shade of meaning the author desires. For example, the NT uses two different words for “love” (for two kinds of love), two words for “another” (another of the same, or another of a different kind), and several words for various kinds of knowledge. Significantly, some words are omitted, such as <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eros<\/span> (a third kind of love) and other words commonly employed in the Hellenistic culture of that time.<\/p>\n<p>Moreover, Greek words often took on new meanings in the context of the gospel, arising from a combination of new teachings with an exalted morality. The writers did not hesitate to use such words as “life,” “death,” “glory,” and “wrath” in new ways to express new thoughts. Sometimes the literal meaning of a word almost disappears, as when the authors use “water,” “washing,” and “baptism” for Christ’s spiritually purifying power. NT vocabulary also contains words found elsewhere only in the Greek OT, such as “circumcision,” “idolatry,” “anathema,” “diaspora,” and “Pentecost.” Loan words from Hebrew or Aramaic include <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">alleluia<\/span> and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">amen<\/span> (Hebrew), and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">abba<\/span><em>,<\/em> <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">mammon<\/span><em>,<\/em> and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">corban<\/span> (Aramaic).<\/p>\n<p>For understanding the meaning of a NT word, then, a lexicon of classical Greek is helpful but not sufficient. One must also know how the word is used in the Greek OT, in Hellenistic writings, and in the inscriptions and documents representing the language of everyday life. Papyrus documents provide many illustrations of the meaning of NT words. For example, the Greek word for “contribution” (1 Cor 16:1), at one time thought to be limited to the NT, is commonly used with the same meaning in the papyri. Many Greek words once defined on the basis of classical Greek have been given sharper meaning in the light of their use in the papyri.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Grammar\">Grammar<\/p>\n<p>As in other Indo-European languages, the meaning of Greek words is affected by the addition and alteration of various prefixes and suffixes (the process known as inflection). Although its system of inflection is simplified compared to classical Greek, NT Greek is more inflected than are many languages. Greek meaning is thus much less susceptible to ambiguity than English.<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to Hebrew, Greek has a neuter gender as well as masculine and feminine. The many and precise Greek prepositions are subtle, having various meanings depending on their context. NT Greek uses only about half of the particles used in classical Greek.<\/p>\n<p>The Greek verb system, much more complicated than that of Hebrew, is capable of nuances of meaning difficult to express even in English. Each Greek verb has five aspects, which grammarians call tense, mood, voice, person, and number.<\/p>\n<h5>Tense<\/h5>\n<p>Greek verb tense deals primarily with <em>kind of action<\/em> rather than <em>time of action<\/em> as in English. In Greek there are three basic kinds of action: <em>durative,<\/em> expressed by the present, imperfect, and (sometimes) future tenses; <em>simple<\/em> or punctiliar, expressed by the aorist and (often) future tenses; and <em>completed,<\/em> expressed by the perfect tense (results of past action continue into the present) and pluperfect tense (results are confined to the past).<\/p>\n<p>Greek tenses are often hard to translate into English; the time of action as well as the verb stem’s basic meaning (such as whether it takes an object) must be subtly blended with the kind of action into a single idea.<\/p>\n<h5>Mood<\/h5>\n<p>The mood shows how a verb’s action should be understood. Is the action real? (Use the indicative mood.) Is the action demanded by someone? (Use the imperative mood.) Does the action depend on other conditions? (Use the subjunctive or optative mood.) Is the action basically descriptive of another substantive? (Use a participle.) Is the action basically substantive? (Use an infinitive.) In grammar, a substantive is a word or group of words functioning as a noun; the last two examples are not strictly moods, but they are used that way by grammarians. The moods give a Greek writer a rich choice of verbal expression.<\/p>\n<h5>Voice<\/h5>\n<p>A verb’s voice describes whether action is directed outward (active), inward (middle), or back upon the sentence’s subject (passive).<\/p>\n<h5>Person<\/h5>\n<p>The person of a verb tells who is doing the acting, whether I (first person), you (second person), or another (third person).<\/p>\n<h5>Number<\/h5>\n<p>Verb number shows whether the action is performed by one person (singular) or more than one person (plural).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Style\">Style<\/p>\n<p>The NT contains a variety of writing styles in its use of Greek. The Gospels especially exhibit Semitic features. Matthew uses a style less picturesque than Mark’s and in some respects close to the style of Luke, Acts, Hebrews, James, and 1 Peter. Luke’s style varies from that of both Mark and Matthew; it is elegant. The rather simple style of John contains many Semitisms.<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostle Paul’s letters, differences of style have been noted. The least literary and most direct in expression are his Letters to the Thessalonians. The Pastorals (1—2 Timothy, Titus) have a style nearer to the koine than most of the other epistles—not so Jewish, and not so much influenced by the Septuagint as his other letters.<\/p>\n<p>The Letter to the Hebrews combines elegance with Jewish-Greek style. James’s letter, though high in cultural quality, is not as sensitive in style as Hebrews. Less elegant is 1 Peter, which is strongly influenced by the Septuagint and thus reflects Semitic style.<\/p>\n<p>The Letter of Jude contains elevated, somewhat ponderous diction, and shows the influence of Jewish style. Second Peter, resembling Jude in its high style, is even more influenced by the Septuagint.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Revelation has a generally simple style but shows considerable Semitic influence in its use of parallelism and redundancy. Linguistic scholars have identified a number of apparent grammatical mistakes in the Greek of Revelation.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GREEK LANGUAGE<\/h3>\n<p>Language of the Greek people.<\/p>\n<p>The Greek language is a beautiful, rich, and well-tuned instrument of communication. It is a fitting tool both for vigorous thought and for religious devotion. During its classical period, Greek was the language of one of the world’s greatest cultures. During that cultural period, language, literature, and art flourished more than war. The Greek mind was preoccupied with ideals of beauty. The Greek language reflected artistry in its philosophical dialogues, its poetry, and its stately orations.<\/p>\n<p>The Greek language was also characterized by strength and vigor. It was capable of variety and striking effects. Greek was a language of argument, with a vocabulary and style that could penetrate and clarify phenomena rather than simply tell stories. Classical Greek elaborately developed many forms from a few word roots. Its complex syntax allowed intricate word arrangements to express fine nuances of meaning.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AncientHistory\">Ancient History<\/p>\n<p>Although the antecedents of Greek are obscure, the first traces of what could be called antecedents of ancient Greek appear in Mycenaean and Minoan documents (1400–1200 <span>BC<\/span>) that use three different scripts: Minoan hieroglyphic (the earliest), linear A, and linear B (the latest). Linear B, generally considered “pre-Greek,” is written in a syllabic script found on clay tablets discovered on the island of Crete and on the Greek mainland.<\/p>\n<p>The Mycenaean civilization and script ended suddenly with the Dorian invasions (1200 <span>BC<\/span>), and writing seems to have disappeared for several centuries. Later, about the eighth century <span>BC<\/span>, Greek writing appeared in a different script. That script was based on an alphabet presumably borrowed from the Phoenicians and then adapted to the Greek speech sound system and direction of writing. Greek was first written from right to left, like the West Semitic languages, then in a back-and-forth pattern, finally from left to right. Several dialects appeared during the archaic period (8th to 6th centuries <span>BC<\/span>): Dorian, Eonian, Achaean, and Aeolic.<\/p>\n<p>During the classical period (5th to 4th centuries <span>BC<\/span>), Greek culture reached its literary and artistic zenith. Classical (or Attic) Greek was characterized by subtlety of syntax and an expressive use of particles (short, uninflected parts of speech, often untranslatable). As the city of Athens attained cultural and political control, the Attic dialect also gained in prestige. With the Macedonian conquests, Attic Greek, combined with influences from other dialects (especially Ionic), became the international language of the eastern Mediterranean area.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HellenismandtheKoineDialect\">Hellenism and the Koine Dialect<\/p>\n<p>The conquests of Alexander the Great encouraged the spread of Greek language and culture. Regional dialects were largely replaced by “Hellenistic” or “koine” (common) Greek. Koine Greek is a dialect preserved and known through thousands of inscriptions reflecting all aspects of daily life. The koine dialect added many vernacular expressions to Attic Greek, thus making it more cosmopolitan. Simplifying the grammar also better adapted it to a worldwide culture. The new language, reflecting simple, popular speech, became the common language of commerce and diplomacy. The Greek language lost much of its elegance and finely shaded nuance as a result of its evolution from classic to koine. Nevertheless, it retained its distinguishing characteristics of strength, beauty, clarity, and logical rhetorical power.<\/p>\n<p>It is significant that the apostle Paul wrote his letter to Christians in Rome in the Greek language rather than in Latin. The Roman Empire of that time was culturally a Greek world, except for governmental transactions.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheSeptuagint\">The Septuagint<\/p>\n<p>During the centuries immediately before Christ, the eastern Mediterranean had been undergoing not only Hellenization but also Semitization. Both influences can be observed in the Greek translation of the OT.<\/p>\n<p>Translation of the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek was an epochal event. The Septuagint (the earliest Greek translation of the OT) later had a strong influence on Christian thought. A necessary consequence of Hebrew writers using the Greek language was that a Greek spirit and Greek forms of thought influenced Jewish culture. The Jews soon appropriated from the rich and refined Greek vocabulary some expressions for ideas that were beyond the scope of Hebrew terminology. Also, old Greek expressions acquired new and extended meanings in this translation of the OT by Greek-speaking Jews.<\/p>\n<p>The Greek OT has been very significant in the development of Christian thought. Often the usage of a Greek word in the Septuagint provides a key to its meaning in the NT. The OT dialect of “Jewish Greek” is at times seen in NT passages translated very literally; at other times, the NT translation of OT texts is very loose.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentGreek\">New Testament Greek<\/p>\n<p>Although most NT authors were Jewish, they wrote in Greek, the universal language of their time. In addition, the apostle John seems to have been acquainted with some Greek philosophy, which influenced his style. John used “word” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span>) in reference to Christ (Jn 1:1), and several other abstract expressions. John may have been influenced by the Egyptian center of Alexandria, where Greek philosophy and Hebrew learning had merged in a unique way.<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul also was acquainted with Greek authors (Acts 17:28; 1 Cor 15:33; Ti 1:12). Thus, Greek orators and philosophers influenced Paul’s language as well as Hebrew prophets and scholars.<\/p>\n<p>Exactly which dialect of Hebrew or Aramaic Jesus spoke is debated. It is certainly possible that Jesus also spoke Greek. The fact remains that the Gospels were originally written as Greek texts. The records in Greek of Jesus’ teachings and accomplishments prepared the way for the gospel to spread throughout a Greek-speaking culture.<\/p>\n<p>The dignity and restraint of koine Greek used by Christian writers was neither so artificial and pedantic as some classical writings nor so trivial and vulgar as spoken koine.<\/p>\n<p>Greek words took on richer, more spiritual meaning in the context of Scripture. Influenced by the simplicity and rich vividness of Semitic style, the NT was not written in a peculiar “Holy Ghost” language (as some medieval scholars believed) but in koine (common) Greek, largely by Semitic-thinking authors. Tens of thousands of papyri unearthed in Egypt in the early 20th century furnish lexical and grammatical parallels to biblical language, revealing that it was part of the linguistic warp and woof of that era. Yet NT Greek was nevertheless “free,” often creating its own idiom. Christian writers influenced Greek thought by introducing new expressions in order to convey their message about Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>Semitic Influence<\/h5>\n<p>Because NT Greek combines the directness of Hebrew thought with the precision of Greek expression, Greek’s subtle delicacy often interprets Hebrew concepts. The Semitic influence is strongest in the Gospels, the book of Revelation, and the Letter of James. Books like Luke and Hebrews exhibit a more typically Greek style. The NT epistles blend the wisdom of Hebrew and the dialectic philosophy of Greek. Sermons recorded in the NT combine the Hebrew prophetic message with Greek oratorical force.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to direct quotes and allusions from the Septuagint, a pervasive Semitic influence on NT Greek has been noted in many areas. For example, the syntax of NT Greek contains many examples of Semitic style.<\/p>\n<h5>Vocabulary<\/h5>\n<p>The Greek NT vocabulary is abundant and sufficient to convey just the shade of meaning the author desires. For example, the NT uses two different words for “love” (for two kinds of love), two words for “another” (another of the same, or another of a different kind), and several words for various kinds of knowledge. Significantly, some words are omitted, such as <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eros<\/span> (a third kind of love) and other words commonly employed in the Hellenistic culture of that time.<\/p>\n<p>Moreover, Greek words often took on new meanings in the context of the gospel, arising from a combination of new teachings with an exalted morality. The writers did not hesitate to use such words as “life,” “death,” “glory,” and “wrath” in new ways to express new thoughts. Sometimes the literal meaning of a word almost disappears, as when the authors use “water,” “washing,” and “baptism” for Christ’s spiritually purifying power. NT vocabulary also contains words found elsewhere only in the Greek OT, such as “circumcision,” “idolatry,” “anathema,” “diaspora,” and “Pentecost.” Loan words from Hebrew or Aramaic include <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">alleluia<\/span> and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">amen<\/span> (Hebrew), and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">abba<\/span><em>,<\/em> <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">mammon<\/span><em>,<\/em> and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">corban<\/span> (Aramaic).<\/p>\n<p>For understanding the meaning of a NT word, then, a lexicon of classical Greek is helpful but not sufficient. One must also know how the word is used in the Greek OT, in Hellenistic writings, and in the inscriptions and documents representing the language of everyday life. Papyrus documents provide many illustrations of the meaning of NT words. For example, the Greek word for “contribution” (1 Cor 16:1), at one time thought to be limited to the NT, is commonly used with the same meaning in the papyri. Many Greek words once defined on the basis of classical Greek have been given sharper meaning in the light of their use in the papyri.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Grammar\">Grammar<\/p>\n<p>As in other Indo-European languages, the meaning of Greek words is affected by the addition and alteration of various prefixes and suffixes (the process known as inflection). Although its system of inflection is simplified compared to classical Greek, NT Greek is more inflected than are many languages. Greek meaning is thus much less susceptible to ambiguity than English.<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to Hebrew, Greek has a neuter gender as well as masculine and feminine. The many and precise Greek prepositions are subtle, having various meanings depending on their context. NT Greek uses only about half of the particles used in classical Greek.<\/p>\n<p>The Greek verb system, much more complicated than that of Hebrew, is capable of nuances of meaning difficult to express even in English. Each Greek verb has five aspects, which grammarians call tense, mood, voice, person, and number.<\/p>\n<h5>Tense<\/h5>\n<p>Greek verb tense deals primarily with <em>kind of action<\/em> rather than <em>time of action<\/em> as in English. In Greek there are three basic kinds of action: <em>durative,<\/em> expressed by the present, imperfect, and (sometimes) future tenses; <em>simple<\/em> or punctiliar, expressed by the aorist and (often) future tenses; and <em>completed,<\/em> expressed by the perfect tense (results of past action continue into the present) and pluperfect tense (results are confined to the past).<\/p>\n<p>Greek tenses are often hard to translate into English; the time of action as well as the verb stem’s basic meaning (such as whether it takes an object) must be subtly blended with the kind of action into a single idea.<\/p>\n<h5>Mood<\/h5>\n<p>The mood shows how a verb’s action should be understood. Is the action real? (Use the indicative mood.) Is the action demanded by someone? (Use the imperative mood.) Does the action depend on other conditions? (Use the subjunctive or optative mood.) Is the action basically descriptive of another substantive? (Use a participle.) Is the action basically substantive? (Use an infinitive.) In grammar, a substantive is a word or group of words functioning as a noun; the last two examples are not strictly moods, but they are used that way by grammarians. The moods give a Greek writer a rich choice of verbal expression.<\/p>\n<h5>Voice<\/h5>\n<p>A verb’s voice describes whether action is directed outward (active), inward (middle), or back upon the sentence’s subject (passive).<\/p>\n<h5>Person<\/h5>\n<p>The person of a verb tells who is doing the acting, whether I (first person), you (second person), or another (third person).<\/p>\n<h5>Number<\/h5>\n<p>Verb number shows whether the action is performed by one person (singular) or more than one person (plural).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Style\">Style<\/p>\n<p>The NT contains a variety of writing styles in its use of Greek. The Gospels especially exhibit Semitic features. Matthew uses a style less picturesque than Mark’s and in some respects close to the style of Luke, Acts, Hebrews, James, and 1 Peter. Luke’s style varies from that of both Mark and Matthew; it is elegant. The rather simple style of John contains many Semitisms.<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostle Paul’s letters, differences of style have been noted. The least literary and most direct in expression are his Letters to the Thessalonians. The Pastorals (1—2 Timothy, Titus) have a style nearer to the koine than most of the other epistles—not so Jewish, and not so much influenced by the Septuagint as his other letters.<\/p>\n<p>The Letter to the Hebrews combines elegance with Jewish-Greek style. James’s letter, though high in cultural quality, is not as sensitive in style as Hebrews. Less elegant is 1 Peter, which is strongly influenced by the Septuagint and thus reflects Semitic style.<\/p>\n<p>The Letter of Jude contains elevated, somewhat ponderous diction, and shows the influence of Jewish style. Second Peter, resembling Jude in its high style, is even more influenced by the Septuagint.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Revelation has a generally simple style but shows considerable Semitic influence in its use of parallelism and redundancy. Linguistic scholars have identified a number of apparent grammatical mistakes in the Greek of Revelation.<\/p>","summary_ro":"GREEK LANGUAGE Language of the Greek people. The Greek language is a beautiful, rich, and well-tuned instrument of communication. It is a fitting tool both for vigorous thought and for religious devotion. During its classical period, Greek was the language of one of the world’s greatest cultures. During that cultural period, language, literature, and art flourished more than war. The Greek mind was preoccupied with ideals of beauty. The Greek language reflected artistry in its philosophical d...","summary_en":"GREEK LANGUAGE Language of the Greek people. The Greek language is a beautiful, rich, and well-tuned instrument of communication. It is a fitting tool both for vigorous thought and for religious devotion. During its classical period, Greek was the language of one of the world’s greatest cultures. During that cultural period, language, literature, and art flourished more than war. The Greek mind was preoccupied with ideals of beauty. The Greek language reflected artistry in its philosophical d...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":17346,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Incarnation*","title_en":"Incarnation*","content_ro":"<h3>INCARNATION*<\/h3>\n<p>Literally, “in flesh”; theologically, the doctrine that in Jesus of Nazareth God took on human flesh and became the God-man. Historically, the doctrine of incarnation was central in the christological debates of patristic times and has recently come to the fore again in academic circles. Biblically, it expresses the mystery of Jesus’ identity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentTestimony\">New Testament Testimony<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Mark has no account of the Incarnation and stresses Jesus’ messiahship more than his deity. As a result, some believe that it represents an earlier stage in the development of the church’s theology, before the doctrine of incarnation had evolved. That is doubtful for two reasons: Incarnation passages like the Philippians hymn (Phil 2:6-11) probably antedate Mark’s Gospel, and Mark has a well-developed theology of the two natures of Christ. Although he stresses Jesus’ humanity, Mark accents it with an emphasis on divinity. Jesus was called the “beloved Son” by a heavenly voice at his baptism and transfiguration (Mk 1:11; 9:7); demons called him divine (3:11; 5:7), as did a Roman centurion (15:39). Jesus’ “Abba” prayers (14:36; cf. Mt 26:39; Lk 22:42) indicate his sense of divine identity, and at his trial he was charged with claiming the title “Son of the Blessed” (14:61-62). Thus, though the Incarnation is nowhere explicitly stated in Mark, it is implicitly affirmed.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew and Luke express the Incarnation. The birth narratives, of course, stress the event itself, with Matthew emphasizing Jesus’ royal messiahship, and Luke, the divine witness of the Holy Spirit. Matthew’s Gospel is Christ-centered; Luke concentrates on Christ as Savior, or more precisely, on salvation-history. Although Matthew presents Jesus’ humanity, he emphasizes his lordship (Mt 23:6-10) and divine sonship. The Incarnation thus becomes the means whereby the divine becomes human in a universal sense (1:23; 18:20; 24:14; 28:18-20). Luke shows the greatest interest of the three in Jesus’ earthly life. Nevertheless, his Gospel does not stress the human side of Jesus as much as Mark’s. Luke portrays Jesus primarily as the divine Savior within history (Lk 2:11; 4:16-30). He combines Jesus’ messianic office and divine nature, showing that the incarnate Son of God suffered and was exalted in order to bring people to God.<\/p>\n<h5>John’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>The apostle John’s doctrine of incarnation is more explicit than any of the others, teaching not only Jesus’ God-man status but also his preexistent “glory” (Jn 1:1-18). Central in this presentation is the oneness between Jesus and God the Father (10:29-30; 14:8-11; 1 Jn 2:23). The “I am” (the expressed Christ, taken from the OT title for the one true God and probably signifying God’s personal name, Yahweh) came to reveal God to his people (Jn 1:4-5, 14, 18). Yet John also has the most balanced presentation of the Incarnation. The divine Logos or Word (1:1-18) is the exemplar of perfect humanity; he “became flesh” (v 14) to enlighten people (vv 5, 9) and generate in them “eternal life” (3:14-18; 1 Jn 1:1-3; 4:9).<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Epistles<\/h5>\n<p>The apostle Paul presented the Incarnation as Jesus’ path to suffering and redemption. In Galatians 4:4-5 the Incarnation (“born of woman”) came “in the fullness of time” or at the apex of salvation-history, to “redeem those who were under the law.” In the Philippians hymn (Phil 2:6-11, quotes from <span>nasb<\/span>), the Incarnation is seen in terms of preexistence (“though he was in the form of God”), humiliation (“emptied . . . humbled”), and obedience (“becoming obedient to the point of death”). The goal of the Incarnation was the cross (“even death on a cross”), and its result was Christ’s exaltation. The hymn is perhaps the supreme theological statement on the Incarnation in the NT. Jesus’ human life was an “emptying,” a refusal to seize the prerogatives of his deity (“did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped”).<\/p>\n<p>Paul described Christ as a second Adam (Rom 5:12-19; 1 Cor 15:45-47), who brought humanity a new possibility to attain what Adam had forsaken. Through assuming the form of a man, Christ became the Redeemer who reconciles people to God (Rom 3:25; 2 Cor 5:19; 1 Tm 1:15). Paul stressed even more, however, that the exalted Christ provides newness of life (Rom 6:4-6; 2 Cor 3:17-18; Col 3:1-4). A hymn in the Letter to the Colossians (1:15-20) employs ideas from Jewish wisdom speculation, and possibly Greek themes, to show Christ as the “firstborn” and the “fullness of God.” The one who always existed as God, through his sacrificial death, became the exalted Lord and brought humankind to God (see also the “flesh-spirit” theme in Rom 1:3-4; 1 Tm 3:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Hebrews<\/h5>\n<p>The Letter to the Hebrews strongly speaks of the Incarnation. The opening hymn (Heb 1:1-3) accents Christ’s exalted status as “the very stamp” of God’s image and the radiance of his glory. Christ is superior to the angels (1:4-9), yet he became a man in order to suffer for human salvation (2:9; 5:7-9). The Incarnation is aligned with sinful humankind’s need for a Savior. The purpose of Hebrews is to show Christ’s incomparable superiority to the OT sacrifices, and at the same time to stress his work of salvation. His real temptation (2:18; 4:15) combined with his sinlessness (4:15; 5:9; 7:26) is the human remedy for human sin. The Incarnation was Christ’s path to final, once-for-all atonement and victory over sin (7:28; 9:26).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalDevelopment\">Historical Development<\/p>\n<p>The first group to challenge the traditional doctrine of incarnation was the Gnostics, who in the late first century denied that Jesus was truly human. Their Greek belief that the physical creation was evil led them to deny the Incarnation. They believed Christ to be a quasi-spiritual being who merely appeared human. The theologian Marcion (d. c. 160), trained by Gnostic teachers, also accepted a docetic interpretation of Christ (his humanity was only apparent). Marcion taught his doctrine as an antidote to the OT or Jewish-oriented Christianity in his day. After his excommunication in <span>AD<\/span> 144, Marcion founded his own church, and his views were widely disseminated in the next two centuries. Partly in reaction to Marcion’s christological heresy, the orthodox churches unified their doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>The next challenge to the orthodox view came through the Arian, Apollinarian, and Nestorian controversies in the third and fourth centuries. Arianism held that the Incarnation was total, so that Christ the Logos was no longer fully God. At the same time, he was not fully human, so Christ was someone between two natures. The Council of Nicaea (<span>AD<\/span> 325) affirmed that Jesus was indeed both God and man. A further question soon arose, however, as to the relation between his two natures. Apollinarius (310?–390?) taught that only the body of Jesus was human; his soul was absorbed completely into the divine Logos. Nestorius (c. 381–451) taught that the two natures must always remain distinct in the person of Christ; they functioned together but were separate in his being. The Council of Chalcedon (<span>AD<\/span> 451) affirmed the unity of the two natures in Jesus. Many opponents of Chalcedon arose, called Monophysites, who believed in one divine nature in Jesus, who was only in a sense human. That movement caused serious political and religious divisions, and the Council of Constantinople (680–81) reaffirmed Chalcedon and established the orthodox incarnation theology.<\/p>\n<p>In the eighth century, Spain and France were centers of the “adoptionist” controversy. Adoptionism taught that at birth Jesus was human, but at his baptism he underwent a “second birth” and was “adopted” as Son of God. It was condemned in a series of synods and never gained many adherents until modern times. During the scholastic age, Peter Lombard (1095?–1160) advocated what became known as “nihilism.” The Incarnation supposedly caused no fundamental change in Jesus’ deity, but his human nature was both insubstantial and unessential. That view likewise was condemned by Pope Alexander III (1159–81). Another debate at that time centered on the relationship between the fall and the Incarnation. Thomas Aquinas (1224–74) concluded that there was a cause-effect connection; the Incarnation was necessitated by sin rather than predestined apart from the fall.<\/p>\n<p>The Roman Catholic Church and the Protestant Reformers follow basically the same orthodox teaching about the Incarnation. The conflict in the Reformation centered more on soteriology (the doctrine of salvation). Several aberrant antitrinitarian movements took advantage of the breakdown in ecclesiastical authority, however. Michael Servetus (1511–53) taught a pantheistic view of the Incarnation, focused on the divine Spirit becoming manifest in the human form of Jesus. Thus the Logos is not a distinct person in the Godhead, nor is it fundamentally different from a “divine spark” in every person. At the same time Laelius Socinus (1525–62) and his nephew, Faustus Socinus (1539–1604), taught a unitarian system. The Incarnation was not a transferral of the divine essence but a communication of divine authority and revelation. Christ thus did not die as an atonement but as a moral example. Both Servetus and Socinianism were condemned by Catholics and Protestants alike.<\/p>\n<p>In the 17th and 18th centuries “kenoticism” (from Greek for “empty”) taught that in the Incarnation the Logos totally “emptied himself” (Phil 2:7) of the divine attributes. That doctrine represented the final phase of a dialogue from the scholastic period about the exact communication between Jesus’ two natures. Was his human nature omnipotent? If not, how did the man Jesus exercise the divine attributes? The kenotic school believed that Jesus was fully human and that his divine nature was quiescent until after the Ascension. His miraculous powers were external, given by the Spirit. Against that view, the majority of theologians argued that Jesus was at all times both God and man, and that in Philippians 2:6-8 Jesus did not lay aside the attributes of deity (he still exhibited the “form of God”) but rather the majesty associated with deity.<\/p>\n<p>The 19th and 20th centuries have given rise to a view that the Incarnation was a “myth,” a pictorial way of describing how God spoke through Jesus. The virgin birth was not historical, nor did any of the supernatural events of the Gospels ever take place. Rather, the stories in the Gospels were concoctions of the later church, efforts to portray Jesus’ impact on the movement. The Gospels, however, have too strong a flavor of accurate history for such a view to prevail (see Lk 1:1-5; Jn 19:35; 21:24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>The NT teaching on the Incarnation balances the humanity and divinity of Christ. Those two facts must harmonize in any theological system, for both are absolutely necessary parts of God’s redemptive plan. In the Incarnation, Jesus became a perfect human being. As God in human flesh, he suffered the divine penalty for sin as an innocent substitute. Being both God and man, Jesus simultaneously revealed God’s will for human life and reconciled sinful people to God through his own perfect life and death. Because of the Incarnation, therefore, those who believe in Christ have peace with God and new life from God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>INCARNATION*<\/h3>\n<p>Literally, “in flesh”; theologically, the doctrine that in Jesus of Nazareth God took on human flesh and became the God-man. Historically, the doctrine of incarnation was central in the christological debates of patristic times and has recently come to the fore again in academic circles. Biblically, it expresses the mystery of Jesus’ identity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentTestimony\">New Testament Testimony<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Mark has no account of the Incarnation and stresses Jesus’ messiahship more than his deity. As a result, some believe that it represents an earlier stage in the development of the church’s theology, before the doctrine of incarnation had evolved. That is doubtful for two reasons: Incarnation passages like the Philippians hymn (Phil 2:6-11) probably antedate Mark’s Gospel, and Mark has a well-developed theology of the two natures of Christ. Although he stresses Jesus’ humanity, Mark accents it with an emphasis on divinity. Jesus was called the “beloved Son” by a heavenly voice at his baptism and transfiguration (Mk 1:11; 9:7); demons called him divine (3:11; 5:7), as did a Roman centurion (15:39). Jesus’ “Abba” prayers (14:36; cf. Mt 26:39; Lk 22:42) indicate his sense of divine identity, and at his trial he was charged with claiming the title “Son of the Blessed” (14:61-62). Thus, though the Incarnation is nowhere explicitly stated in Mark, it is implicitly affirmed.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew and Luke express the Incarnation. The birth narratives, of course, stress the event itself, with Matthew emphasizing Jesus’ royal messiahship, and Luke, the divine witness of the Holy Spirit. Matthew’s Gospel is Christ-centered; Luke concentrates on Christ as Savior, or more precisely, on salvation-history. Although Matthew presents Jesus’ humanity, he emphasizes his lordship (Mt 23:6-10) and divine sonship. The Incarnation thus becomes the means whereby the divine becomes human in a universal sense (1:23; 18:20; 24:14; 28:18-20). Luke shows the greatest interest of the three in Jesus’ earthly life. Nevertheless, his Gospel does not stress the human side of Jesus as much as Mark’s. Luke portrays Jesus primarily as the divine Savior within history (Lk 2:11; 4:16-30). He combines Jesus’ messianic office and divine nature, showing that the incarnate Son of God suffered and was exalted in order to bring people to God.<\/p>\n<h5>John’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>The apostle John’s doctrine of incarnation is more explicit than any of the others, teaching not only Jesus’ God-man status but also his preexistent “glory” (Jn 1:1-18). Central in this presentation is the oneness between Jesus and God the Father (10:29-30; 14:8-11; 1 Jn 2:23). The “I am” (the expressed Christ, taken from the OT title for the one true God and probably signifying God’s personal name, Yahweh) came to reveal God to his people (Jn 1:4-5, 14, 18). Yet John also has the most balanced presentation of the Incarnation. The divine Logos or Word (1:1-18) is the exemplar of perfect humanity; he “became flesh” (v 14) to enlighten people (vv 5, 9) and generate in them “eternal life” (3:14-18; 1 Jn 1:1-3; 4:9).<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Epistles<\/h5>\n<p>The apostle Paul presented the Incarnation as Jesus’ path to suffering and redemption. In Galatians 4:4-5 the Incarnation (“born of woman”) came “in the fullness of time” or at the apex of salvation-history, to “redeem those who were under the law.” In the Philippians hymn (Phil 2:6-11, quotes from <span>nasb<\/span>), the Incarnation is seen in terms of preexistence (“though he was in the form of God”), humiliation (“emptied . . . humbled”), and obedience (“becoming obedient to the point of death”). The goal of the Incarnation was the cross (“even death on a cross”), and its result was Christ’s exaltation. The hymn is perhaps the supreme theological statement on the Incarnation in the NT. Jesus’ human life was an “emptying,” a refusal to seize the prerogatives of his deity (“did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped”).<\/p>\n<p>Paul described Christ as a second Adam (Rom 5:12-19; 1 Cor 15:45-47), who brought humanity a new possibility to attain what Adam had forsaken. Through assuming the form of a man, Christ became the Redeemer who reconciles people to God (Rom 3:25; 2 Cor 5:19; 1 Tm 1:15). Paul stressed even more, however, that the exalted Christ provides newness of life (Rom 6:4-6; 2 Cor 3:17-18; Col 3:1-4). A hymn in the Letter to the Colossians (1:15-20) employs ideas from Jewish wisdom speculation, and possibly Greek themes, to show Christ as the “firstborn” and the “fullness of God.” The one who always existed as God, through his sacrificial death, became the exalted Lord and brought humankind to God (see also the “flesh-spirit” theme in Rom 1:3-4; 1 Tm 3:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Hebrews<\/h5>\n<p>The Letter to the Hebrews strongly speaks of the Incarnation. The opening hymn (Heb 1:1-3) accents Christ’s exalted status as “the very stamp” of God’s image and the radiance of his glory. Christ is superior to the angels (1:4-9), yet he became a man in order to suffer for human salvation (2:9; 5:7-9). The Incarnation is aligned with sinful humankind’s need for a Savior. The purpose of Hebrews is to show Christ’s incomparable superiority to the OT sacrifices, and at the same time to stress his work of salvation. His real temptation (2:18; 4:15) combined with his sinlessness (4:15; 5:9; 7:26) is the human remedy for human sin. The Incarnation was Christ’s path to final, once-for-all atonement and victory over sin (7:28; 9:26).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalDevelopment\">Historical Development<\/p>\n<p>The first group to challenge the traditional doctrine of incarnation was the Gnostics, who in the late first century denied that Jesus was truly human. Their Greek belief that the physical creation was evil led them to deny the Incarnation. They believed Christ to be a quasi-spiritual being who merely appeared human. The theologian Marcion (d. c. 160), trained by Gnostic teachers, also accepted a docetic interpretation of Christ (his humanity was only apparent). Marcion taught his doctrine as an antidote to the OT or Jewish-oriented Christianity in his day. After his excommunication in <span>AD<\/span> 144, Marcion founded his own church, and his views were widely disseminated in the next two centuries. Partly in reaction to Marcion’s christological heresy, the orthodox churches unified their doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>The next challenge to the orthodox view came through the Arian, Apollinarian, and Nestorian controversies in the third and fourth centuries. Arianism held that the Incarnation was total, so that Christ the Logos was no longer fully God. At the same time, he was not fully human, so Christ was someone between two natures. The Council of Nicaea (<span>AD<\/span> 325) affirmed that Jesus was indeed both God and man. A further question soon arose, however, as to the relation between his two natures. Apollinarius (310?–390?) taught that only the body of Jesus was human; his soul was absorbed completely into the divine Logos. Nestorius (c. 381–451) taught that the two natures must always remain distinct in the person of Christ; they functioned together but were separate in his being. The Council of Chalcedon (<span>AD<\/span> 451) affirmed the unity of the two natures in Jesus. Many opponents of Chalcedon arose, called Monophysites, who believed in one divine nature in Jesus, who was only in a sense human. That movement caused serious political and religious divisions, and the Council of Constantinople (680–81) reaffirmed Chalcedon and established the orthodox incarnation theology.<\/p>\n<p>In the eighth century, Spain and France were centers of the “adoptionist” controversy. Adoptionism taught that at birth Jesus was human, but at his baptism he underwent a “second birth” and was “adopted” as Son of God. It was condemned in a series of synods and never gained many adherents until modern times. During the scholastic age, Peter Lombard (1095?–1160) advocated what became known as “nihilism.” The Incarnation supposedly caused no fundamental change in Jesus’ deity, but his human nature was both insubstantial and unessential. That view likewise was condemned by Pope Alexander III (1159–81). Another debate at that time centered on the relationship between the fall and the Incarnation. Thomas Aquinas (1224–74) concluded that there was a cause-effect connection; the Incarnation was necessitated by sin rather than predestined apart from the fall.<\/p>\n<p>The Roman Catholic Church and the Protestant Reformers follow basically the same orthodox teaching about the Incarnation. The conflict in the Reformation centered more on soteriology (the doctrine of salvation). Several aberrant antitrinitarian movements took advantage of the breakdown in ecclesiastical authority, however. Michael Servetus (1511–53) taught a pantheistic view of the Incarnation, focused on the divine Spirit becoming manifest in the human form of Jesus. Thus the Logos is not a distinct person in the Godhead, nor is it fundamentally different from a “divine spark” in every person. At the same time Laelius Socinus (1525–62) and his nephew, Faustus Socinus (1539–1604), taught a unitarian system. The Incarnation was not a transferral of the divine essence but a communication of divine authority and revelation. Christ thus did not die as an atonement but as a moral example. Both Servetus and Socinianism were condemned by Catholics and Protestants alike.<\/p>\n<p>In the 17th and 18th centuries “kenoticism” (from Greek for “empty”) taught that in the Incarnation the Logos totally “emptied himself” (Phil 2:7) of the divine attributes. That doctrine represented the final phase of a dialogue from the scholastic period about the exact communication between Jesus’ two natures. Was his human nature omnipotent? If not, how did the man Jesus exercise the divine attributes? The kenotic school believed that Jesus was fully human and that his divine nature was quiescent until after the Ascension. His miraculous powers were external, given by the Spirit. Against that view, the majority of theologians argued that Jesus was at all times both God and man, and that in Philippians 2:6-8 Jesus did not lay aside the attributes of deity (he still exhibited the “form of God”) but rather the majesty associated with deity.<\/p>\n<p>The 19th and 20th centuries have given rise to a view that the Incarnation was a “myth,” a pictorial way of describing how God spoke through Jesus. The virgin birth was not historical, nor did any of the supernatural events of the Gospels ever take place. Rather, the stories in the Gospels were concoctions of the later church, efforts to portray Jesus’ impact on the movement. The Gospels, however, have too strong a flavor of accurate history for such a view to prevail (see Lk 1:1-5; Jn 19:35; 21:24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>The NT teaching on the Incarnation balances the humanity and divinity of Christ. Those two facts must harmonize in any theological system, for both are absolutely necessary parts of God’s redemptive plan. In the Incarnation, Jesus became a perfect human being. As God in human flesh, he suffered the divine penalty for sin as an innocent substitute. Being both God and man, Jesus simultaneously revealed God’s will for human life and reconciled sinful people to God through his own perfect life and death. Because of the Incarnation, therefore, those who believe in Christ have peace with God and new life from God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"INCARNATION* Literally, “in flesh”; theologically, the doctrine that in Jesus of Nazareth God took on human flesh and became the God-man. Historically, the doctrine of incarnation was central in the christological debates of patristic times and has recently come to the fore again in academic circles. Biblically, it expresses the mystery of Jesus’ identity. New Testament Testimony The Synoptic Gospels The Gospel of Mark has no account of the Incarnation and stresses Jesus’ messiahship more tha...","summary_en":"INCARNATION* Literally, “in flesh”; theologically, the doctrine that in Jesus of Nazareth God took on human flesh and became the God-man. Historically, the doctrine of incarnation was central in the christological debates of patristic times and has recently come to the fore again in academic circles. Biblically, it expresses the mystery of Jesus’ identity. New Testament Testimony The Synoptic Gospels The Gospel of Mark has no account of the Incarnation and stresses Jesus’ messiahship more tha...","source":"Articles\/I.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19404,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jesus Christ","title_en":"Jesus Christ","content_ro":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","summary_en":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20186,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel of John","title_en":"Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>JOHN, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>The fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospels. (See discussion above on John, the Apostle.)<\/p>\n\n<p>The Gospel appears to have been written by one who knew the Jews and the Palestine of Jesus’ day well. He was familiar with Jewish messianic expectations (e.g., Jn 1:20-21; 4:25; 7:40-42; 12:34). He knew of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9) and the contempt the Pharisees had for “the people of the land” (7:49). He knew of the importance attached to the religious schools (v 15). He knew the way the Sabbath was observed and was aware of the provision that the obligation to circumcise on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath regulations (vv 22-23). Throughout the Gospel he moved with certainty in the vast range of Jewish ideas and customs.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same with topography. The writer mentioned many places, and his place-names all seem to be used correctly. He referred to Cana, a village not mentioned in any earlier literature known to us, which means that the reference almost certainly came from someone who actually knew the place. He located Bethany with some precision as about 15 stadia from Jerusalem (about 2 miles, or 3.2 kilometers, 11:18). He had several references to places in or near Jerusalem, such as Bethesda (5:2), Siloam (9:7), and the Kidron Valley (18:1). Of course, this does not rule out some contemporary of John’s, but it makes it difficult to think of the author as a much later individual writing at a distance from Palestine. The evidence as we have it indicates that the writer was a Jew in the Palestine of Jesus’ day.<\/p>\n<p>To many careful readers, it seems that the Gospel bears the stamp of an eyewitness. For example, Jesus was teaching “in the treasury” (8:20). Nothing is made of the point; the incident could easily have been told without it. It looks like a reminiscence of someone who sees the scene in his mind’s eye as he writes. The fact that the house was filled with fragrance when the woman broke the perfume jar (12:3) does not materially affect the account but is the kind of detail that one who was there would remember. The author noted that the loaves used in the feeding of the multitude were barley loaves (6:9) and that Jesus’ tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top to bottom (19:23). He told us that the branches with which Jesus was greeted were palm branches (12:13), and that it was night when Judas went out (13:30). Such touches are found throughout the Gospel, and it seems unjustified to treat them as no more than an attempt to create verisimilitude. They seem much more like indications that the author was writing about events in which he had himself taken part.<\/p>\n<p>The early church accepted Johannine authorship without question. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all see the apostle as the author. The first to quote this Gospel by name was Theophilus of Antioch, about <span>AD<\/span> 180.<\/p>\n<p>Those who object to Johannine authorship emphasize the differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics. The argument is that if Jesus was anything like the Christ portrayed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he could not be like the Christ of the fourth Gospel. This is a completely subjective argument, ignoring the fact that any great man will appear differently to different people. The judgment of the church throughout the centuries has been that Jesus was large enough to inspire both portraits. To put the same point another way, we have no reason for holding that the first three Evangelists tell us all there is to know about Jesus. There is no contradiction. John simply brings out other aspects of Jesus’ life and teachings.<\/p>\n<p>While we cannot prove beyond all doubt that John the apostle was the author, we can say that there is more reason for holding to this view than to any other.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>It has been usual for conservatives and liberals alike to date this writing in the last decade of the first century or early in the second. Some liberal scholars have put it well into the second century, but this is not common, and it is remarkable that there has been such a considerable measure of agreement.<\/p>\n<p>It is said that this Gospel is dependent on the Synoptics, which means that it must be dated sometime after them. But this argument has been widely abandoned in recent times. There is so much in John that is without parallel in the other three Gospels, and conversely so much in the other three that John might have used had he known it, that it is very difficult indeed to hold that this writer had any of the other Gospels before him when he wrote, or even that he had read them. Such resemblances as there are seem better explained by common use of oral tradition.<\/p>\n<p>It is also argued that there is a very developed theology in John and that we must allow time for its development. Granted, the theology of this Gospel is profound, but this does not require that we must wait for it until the end of the first century. The theology of the Letter to the Romans is also profound, and there is no reason for dating that writing later than the 50s. On the ground of development, then, there is no reason for putting John later than Romans. Development is a slippery argument at best, for it usually takes place at uneven rates, and we have no means of knowing how fast it took place in the area where the author lived.<\/p>\n<p>Other arguments for a late date are no more conclusive. For example, it is urged that the ecclesiastical system presupposed by the Gospel is too late for the time of the apostle John, and that the sacramental system of chapters 3 and 6 must have taken time to develop. But John does not mention any sacrament. It is true that many scholars think these chapters refer to baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but the fact is that John mentions neither.<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising in view of the way the traditional arguments have crumbled away that many in recent times are arguing that John must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70. If it were later, why does not John have some reference to it? Some of his language appears to be earlier. In 5:2 he says there “is” (not “was”) a pool called Bethesda. And he often refers to the Twelve as Jesus’ disciples, or “his” disciples, or the like. In later times Christians usually said “the” disciples, for they saw no need to say whose the disciples were. But in the early days, when Christians were in contact with rabbis (each of whom had his disciples), it was important to show that Jesus’ disciples were in mind. It is important also that John makes no reference to any of the synoptic Gospels. The simplest explanation is that he had not seen them. They were not yet widely circulated.<\/p>\n<p>None of this enables us to date this Gospel with precision. But the weight of evidence points to an early date (before <span>AD<\/span> 70).<\/p>\n<p>The author was John the apostle, a Jew. However, the writing gives evidence of contact with Greek thought, for example, in the reference to Christ as “the Word” in chapter 1 and the translation of words like “rabbi” (1:38). It is almost universally held that such considerations compel us to see the work as originating in a center of Greek culture, and Ephesus has traditionally been favored. Before the end of the second century we have Irenaeus writing that John published the Gospel during his residence at Ephesus.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to similarities between John and the Odes of Solomon, which they think came from Syria. As there are also some resemblances in the language of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, this is held to show that John was written in Syria, probably at Antioch. Others again think that Egypt was the place, and they support this by pointing out that the oldest fragment of a manuscript of this Gospel was found there. There is no real evidence, and we are left with probabilities. There is much to be said for accepting the evidence of Irenaeus and seeing Ephesus as the place of origin, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>There is no real indication of the intended destination. From 20:31 we learn that the book was written that the readers might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and that by believing they might have life. The Gospel, then, has an evangelistic aim. But it is also possible that “believe” means “keep on believing”—“go on in faith,” rather than “begin to believe.” That is to say, the book may have been meant from the beginning to build people up in the faith. Probably we should not distinguish between these aims too sharply. Both may well be in mind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Several possible backgrounds to the Gospel have been suggested. The Greek interest is obvious, and this writing has sometimes been called the Gospel of the Hellenists. The suggestion is that we should look to Greek writings, perhaps the works of the philosophers or Philo of Alexandria, to find the right background against which to understand what John has written. This approach may be seen in the work of Rudolf Bultmann, who thought specifically of Gnosticism. Indeed, for Bultmann one of the sources of this Gospel was a discourse source that he thought was taken from non-Christian Gnosticism. Not many have been prepared to follow Bultmann, but a number of recent commentators have discerned some form of Gnosticism as the backdrop to John.<\/p>\n<p>While such views are put forward seriously, there are some substantial objections. One is that, despite the confident assertions of some scholars, Gnosticism has never been shown to be earlier than Christianity. In the form in which it comes before us in history, it is a Christian heresy, and of course, the Christian faith must appear before a Christian heresy is possible. Another objection is that there is a basic difference between the two systems. Gnosticism is concerned with knowledge (the very word is derived from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>,<\/em> “knowledge”). Its “redeemer” is one who comes from heaven with knowledge. But John does not subscribe to the view that man is saved by knowledge. The Redeemer comes to take away the sin of the world (1:29). Gnosticism tells people that life is an upward struggle; Christianity tells of a Savior who came down to raise them up. It is not easy to see any form of Gnosticism as the essential background to Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Much more significant is John’s Semitic background. Especially important here is the OT, accepted as sacred Scripture by Jew and Christian alike. It lies constantly behind John’s statements, and it must be studied carefully if John is to be understood. It is plain that John knew and loved the Septuagint, the translation into Greek of the Hebrew OT. Again and again, the Septuagint can be shown to lie behind what John says.<\/p>\n<p>In modern times important discoveries have been made at Qumran, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. Among the scrolls unearthed in the caves of this area are several that have affinities with John. Indeed, one of the interesting facts about the scrolls is that they have more parallels with John than with any other part of the NT, a fact difficult to explain if John was written late and at a distance from Palestine. The resemblances to the Qumran writings must be viewed with care, for there is often a linguistic resemblance where the thinking is quite different. For example, both use the unusual expression “the Spirit of truth.” But where John means one of the persons of the Trinity, the scrolls speak of “a spirit of truth” and “a spirit of error” striving in the souls of people. The connection is real, but John is clearly not dependent on the scrolls for his thinking. The contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they afford additional evidence that this Gospel is basically Palestinian and must be understood against a background of first-century Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Other backgrounds have been suggested, such as the Hermetic literature. This is a group of writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus (“Hermes Thrice-greatest”), a designation of the Egyptian god Thoth. There are indeed some points of contact with John, but they are few in comparison with those of writings rooted in Palestine. It is difficult to take such suggestions seriously. John is essentially Palestinian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The writer told us that Jesus did many “signs” (or miracles) that he had not recorded, but “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life” (Jn 20:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). John wrote to show that Jesus is the Messiah. But he did not do this simply with a view to conveying interesting information. He wanted his readers to see this knowledge as a challenge to faith; when they believe, they will have life. John sought to bring men and women to Christ; he had an evangelistic aim. That does not exhaust what he was trying to do, for his words have meaning for believers. It is important that believers have a right knowledge of Jesus and that they continue to believe.<\/p>\n<p>The main theological teaching of this Gospel, then, is that God has sent his Messiah, Jesus. He is the very Son of God, and he comes to bring life (3:16). Though Jesus told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, this is not often said so specifically. The avoidance of the term might well be because of the political overtones it had acquired among the Jews at large. They looked for a Messiah who would fight the Romans. He would defeat them and set up a mighty world empire with its capital in Jerusalem. Jesus was not aiming at anything like that, and it was important that he avoid the kind of language that would give that impression. But though the conventional messianic terminology is avoided, John left no doubt that Jesus was God’s chosen one. Again and again he depicted Jesus as fulfilling messianic functions. For example, in the long discourse in chapter 6 we see Jesus as the bread from heaven, fulfilling the expectation that when Messiah came, he would renew the manna; and in the giving of sight to the blind man (ch 9) we have another messianic function (cf. Is 35:5).<\/p>\n<p>With this greatness of Jesus, John also combined teaching about his lowliness. A continuing, though unobtrusive, strand of Johannine teaching is that Jesus depends on the Father for everything. Apart from the Father, Jesus said, he could do nothing (Jn 5:30). His very food is to do the Father’s will (4:34). He lives through the Father (6:57). It is the Father who gives him his disciples (6:37, 44; 17:6). It is the Father who bears witness to him (5:32, 37). John insists that Jesus is in no sense independent of the Father. In the mission of Jesus, John sees the working out of the purpose of the Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue and Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>John begins with a prologue (1:1-18) that is unlike anything in any of the other Gospels. In it he refers to Jesus as “the Word,” a term that has points of contact with both Greek and Hebrew thinking. As John uses it, it conveys the thought that Jesus is the expression of the mind of the Father. John speaks of the Word as God (1:1), sees him as active in creation (1:3-5), goes on to the witness borne to him by John the Baptist (1:6-8), speaks of the coming of the Word into the world (1:9-14), and finishes with a section on the greatness of the Word (1:15-18). In this prologue he briefly introduces some of the great themes that will be developed throughout the Gospel. It is a majestic introduction to the whole.<\/p>\n<p>Next we have the beginnings of Jesus’ public ministry (1:19-51). Jesus’ work was preceded by that of John the Baptist, and the Evangelist tells us first about the kind of witness that the Baptist gave to Jesus. Witness is one of his important concepts, and witness is all that John the Baptist does in this Gospel. From this witness we move to the way the first disciples came to Jesus. We learn something of how Andrew and Peter came to know the Lord. We read also of Philip and Nathanael, of whom we learn little or nothing in the other Gospels.<\/p>\n<h5>The Signs and Discourses (2:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The public ministry of Jesus is described in a very distinctive way in this Gospel. John has a long section (chs 2–12) in which he tells of a number of miracles Jesus did, interweaving into his account a series of discourses. Sometimes these are addresses given to groups of people, and sometimes they are talks with individuals. Some scholars call this section of the Gospel the Book of Signs, thus emphasizing the prominent place given to seven miracles. For John they are not simply wonders. They are meaningful; in the literal sense of the term they are <em>sign<\/em>ificant.<\/p>\n<p>The first of them is the turning of the water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee (2:1-11). The water in question is connected with Jewish rites of purification (v 6), and the story is surely to teach us that Jesus transforms life. He changes the water of the law into the wine of the gospel. As a result of this “sign,” his disciples believed in him (v 11). John went on to tell how Jesus went up to Jerusalem and drove the traders out of the temple. They were selling animals for sacrifice and changing money. But their business was being done in the Court of the Gentiles, the only place in the temple where a Gentile could come to meditate and pray.<\/p>\n<p>The first discourse is on the new birth (3:1-21). Jesus talked with Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, about the necessity for radical renewal if one is to enter the kingdom. Jesus was speaking of God’s regenerating activity, not some human reformation. Following this, John records a dispute between some of John’s disciples with a Jew on the subject of purification. This opens the way for a section that shows the superiority of Jesus over John the Baptist—by the Baptist’s own confession (3:22-36).<\/p>\n<p>The second discourse is really a long conversation Jesus had with the woman of Samaria, whom he met by a well (4:1-42). It turns on “the water of life,” a term that is not fully explained in this chapter but which we later find points to the life-giving Spirit (7:38-39). This leads to the story of the second sign, the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54), notable for the fact that Jesus healed at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>The third sign is the healing of the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (5:1-18). This man had spent many years waiting for healing at the moving of the water. Jesus told him to get up and walk, and he did. Because it was done on a Sabbath, the Pharisees objected. This leads to Jesus’ third discourse, that on the divine Son (5:19-47). Here the closeness of the relationship of Jesus to the Father is stressed, and his place in the judgment is brought out. There is emphasis also on the variety of witness who encountered Jesus, which shows how reasonable it is to accept him as God’s own Son.<\/p>\n<p>John’s fourth sign is the one miracle (apart from the resurrection) found in all four Gospels: the feeding of the 5,000 (6:1-15). It is followed by Jesus’ walking on water (vv 16-21), which seems to be meant as the fifth sign (though some scholars think not; if they are right, there are only six signs). Then comes the fourth discourse, the great sermon on the bread of life (vv 22-59). Jesus is this bread, which he gives to all men and women who believe in him. There are references to eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv 50-58), which point to his death. Some have seen in them a reference to Communion, but it is hard to see why Jesus should refer in this way to an as-yet-nonexistent sacrament. Moreover, much the same effect is attributed in the same discourse to believing (vv 35, 47). It seems best to understand Jesus as meaning that people must believe in him as the one who would die for them in order for them to have life.<\/p>\n<p>There is a section detailing Peter’s affirmation of loyalty in the face of some who drifted away from the Master (6:67-71). Then we come to the fifth discourse, on the life-giving Spirit (7:1-52). John has an important explanatory point of his own when he tells us that at the time the Spirit had not been given because Jesus had not yet been glorified (v 39). The fullness of the Spirit depends on the completion of the work of Christ in his death and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The sixth discourse tells of the light of the world (8:12-59). This aspect of Jesus’ person and ministry is dramatically brought out in the sixth sign, the healing of the man born blind (ch 9). It is a lively narrative, as the healed man conducts a spirited defense against the Pharisees who belittled Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most beautiful of all the illustrations of Jesus’ relations to his people is that on which he dwells in the seventh discourse, where he speaks of himself as the good shepherd (ch 10). There is the obvious truth that sheep depend entirely on their shepherd, but Jesus says something else. Whereas earthly shepherds live to meet the needs of their sheep, Jesus laid down his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The final sign is the raising of Lazarus (11:1-44), a man who had been dead for four days. The story graphically brings out Jesus’ power over death and his readiness to confer the gift of life. Jesus speaks of himself as “the resurrection and the life” (v 25); death cannot defeat him. He brings life to the dead, to the spiritually dead as well as to physically dead Lazarus. John goes on to note the reaction to this miracle: some believed, but some opposed Jesus (vv 45-57). He includes a notable saying of Caiaphas, the high priest, that one man should die for the people (vv 50-52). Caiaphas was speaking as a cynical politician (better one dead, however innocent, than the whole nation be troubled). But John saw in the words the deeper meaning that Jesus’ death would bring salvation to many.<\/p>\n<p>John rounds off his account of the ministry with the story of the anointing of Jesus by a woman in Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the coming of some Greeks to Jesus, and his final summary of what he had taught (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Last Supper<\/h5>\n<p>The account of what went on in the upper room on the night before the Crucifixion is the fullest of all the four Gospels. Curiously, John says nothing about the institution of Communion, a fact that has never been satisfactorily explained. But he tells us how Jesus washed the feet of the disciples (13:1-17), an action splendidly exemplifying the spirit of lowly service so soon to be shown on the cross. Then comes the prophecy of the betrayal, an action that set in motion the events that would lead to the cross (vv 18-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the long discourse that follows, Jesus dealt with some questions posed by his followers and went on to teach them some important truths, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). He develops the thought that he is the true vine, the disciples being vitally joined to him as branches to the vine. It is important for the branches to remain in the vine if they are to have life (15:1-16). Then come some words about suffering that would be of help to them in times of persecution (vv 17-25). Jesus goes on to speak about the Holy Spirit (15:26–16:15). This is a very important passage, for it contains much more about the Spirit than we find elsewhere in Jesus’ words. Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete,” a title not easy to understand. It is in origin a legal term, and at least we can say that it indicates that the Spirit brings friendship, encouragement, and help. Jesus went on to speak of his approaching departure from the disciples and to prepare them for the trying time ahead (16:16-33). This part of the Gospel concludes with Jesus’ great High Priestly prayer. He prayed for the disciples to be one, as he commended them to the care of the heavenly Father (ch 17).<\/p>\n<h5>The Cross and Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, he went forward to meet them and they fell to the ground (18:1-11). He gave himself over to them; they did not take him over. At the outset of his passion narrative, John was making the point that Jesus is sovereign. He was not being defeated by the march of events but was sovereignly doing the will of the Father. John is the only one to tell us that Jesus was taken before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, the reigning high priest (18:12-14, 19-24). He tells also of Peter’s three denials of Jesus (vv 15-27). He did not spend much time on the Jewish trial, but he was much more explicit than the other Evangelists in his account of the Roman trial. Clearly, he had some special knowledge of what went on before Pilate. He presents a magnificent picture of Jesus talking with Pilate about kingship—the Son of God discussing with the representative of Caesar the meaning of sovereignty (vv 33-40).<\/p>\n<p>In his account of the Crucifixion John has a number of touches of his own, notably the way Jesus commended Mary to the care of the beloved disciple (19:26-27), the fact that the cry Jesus uttered as he died was “It is finished” (v 30), and the piercing of his side by a soldier’s spear (vv 31-37).<\/p>\n<p>John proceeds to the narrative of the burial (vv 38-42) and of the empty tomb (20:1-10). He speaks of appearances of the risen Lord to Mary Magdalene (vv 11-18), and to the disciples—both without (vv 19-23) and with Thomas (vv 24-29).<\/p>\n<p>The final chapter, an epilogue, tells of a miraculous catch of fish (21:1-14) and goes on to the moving account of Peter’s threefold declaration of love to Jesus and his restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOHN, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>The fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospels. (See discussion above on John, the Apostle.)<\/p>\n\n<p>The Gospel appears to have been written by one who knew the Jews and the Palestine of Jesus’ day well. He was familiar with Jewish messianic expectations (e.g., Jn 1:20-21; 4:25; 7:40-42; 12:34). He knew of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9) and the contempt the Pharisees had for “the people of the land” (7:49). He knew of the importance attached to the religious schools (v 15). He knew the way the Sabbath was observed and was aware of the provision that the obligation to circumcise on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath regulations (vv 22-23). Throughout the Gospel he moved with certainty in the vast range of Jewish ideas and customs.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same with topography. The writer mentioned many places, and his place-names all seem to be used correctly. He referred to Cana, a village not mentioned in any earlier literature known to us, which means that the reference almost certainly came from someone who actually knew the place. He located Bethany with some precision as about 15 stadia from Jerusalem (about 2 miles, or 3.2 kilometers, 11:18). He had several references to places in or near Jerusalem, such as Bethesda (5:2), Siloam (9:7), and the Kidron Valley (18:1). Of course, this does not rule out some contemporary of John’s, but it makes it difficult to think of the author as a much later individual writing at a distance from Palestine. The evidence as we have it indicates that the writer was a Jew in the Palestine of Jesus’ day.<\/p>\n<p>To many careful readers, it seems that the Gospel bears the stamp of an eyewitness. For example, Jesus was teaching “in the treasury” (8:20). Nothing is made of the point; the incident could easily have been told without it. It looks like a reminiscence of someone who sees the scene in his mind’s eye as he writes. The fact that the house was filled with fragrance when the woman broke the perfume jar (12:3) does not materially affect the account but is the kind of detail that one who was there would remember. The author noted that the loaves used in the feeding of the multitude were barley loaves (6:9) and that Jesus’ tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top to bottom (19:23). He told us that the branches with which Jesus was greeted were palm branches (12:13), and that it was night when Judas went out (13:30). Such touches are found throughout the Gospel, and it seems unjustified to treat them as no more than an attempt to create verisimilitude. They seem much more like indications that the author was writing about events in which he had himself taken part.<\/p>\n<p>The early church accepted Johannine authorship without question. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all see the apostle as the author. The first to quote this Gospel by name was Theophilus of Antioch, about <span>AD<\/span> 180.<\/p>\n<p>Those who object to Johannine authorship emphasize the differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics. The argument is that if Jesus was anything like the Christ portrayed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he could not be like the Christ of the fourth Gospel. This is a completely subjective argument, ignoring the fact that any great man will appear differently to different people. The judgment of the church throughout the centuries has been that Jesus was large enough to inspire both portraits. To put the same point another way, we have no reason for holding that the first three Evangelists tell us all there is to know about Jesus. There is no contradiction. John simply brings out other aspects of Jesus’ life and teachings.<\/p>\n<p>While we cannot prove beyond all doubt that John the apostle was the author, we can say that there is more reason for holding to this view than to any other.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>It has been usual for conservatives and liberals alike to date this writing in the last decade of the first century or early in the second. Some liberal scholars have put it well into the second century, but this is not common, and it is remarkable that there has been such a considerable measure of agreement.<\/p>\n<p>It is said that this Gospel is dependent on the Synoptics, which means that it must be dated sometime after them. But this argument has been widely abandoned in recent times. There is so much in John that is without parallel in the other three Gospels, and conversely so much in the other three that John might have used had he known it, that it is very difficult indeed to hold that this writer had any of the other Gospels before him when he wrote, or even that he had read them. Such resemblances as there are seem better explained by common use of oral tradition.<\/p>\n<p>It is also argued that there is a very developed theology in John and that we must allow time for its development. Granted, the theology of this Gospel is profound, but this does not require that we must wait for it until the end of the first century. The theology of the Letter to the Romans is also profound, and there is no reason for dating that writing later than the 50s. On the ground of development, then, there is no reason for putting John later than Romans. Development is a slippery argument at best, for it usually takes place at uneven rates, and we have no means of knowing how fast it took place in the area where the author lived.<\/p>\n<p>Other arguments for a late date are no more conclusive. For example, it is urged that the ecclesiastical system presupposed by the Gospel is too late for the time of the apostle John, and that the sacramental system of chapters 3 and 6 must have taken time to develop. But John does not mention any sacrament. It is true that many scholars think these chapters refer to baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but the fact is that John mentions neither.<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising in view of the way the traditional arguments have crumbled away that many in recent times are arguing that John must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70. If it were later, why does not John have some reference to it? Some of his language appears to be earlier. In 5:2 he says there “is” (not “was”) a pool called Bethesda. And he often refers to the Twelve as Jesus’ disciples, or “his” disciples, or the like. In later times Christians usually said “the” disciples, for they saw no need to say whose the disciples were. But in the early days, when Christians were in contact with rabbis (each of whom had his disciples), it was important to show that Jesus’ disciples were in mind. It is important also that John makes no reference to any of the synoptic Gospels. The simplest explanation is that he had not seen them. They were not yet widely circulated.<\/p>\n<p>None of this enables us to date this Gospel with precision. But the weight of evidence points to an early date (before <span>AD<\/span> 70).<\/p>\n<p>The author was John the apostle, a Jew. However, the writing gives evidence of contact with Greek thought, for example, in the reference to Christ as “the Word” in chapter 1 and the translation of words like “rabbi” (1:38). It is almost universally held that such considerations compel us to see the work as originating in a center of Greek culture, and Ephesus has traditionally been favored. Before the end of the second century we have Irenaeus writing that John published the Gospel during his residence at Ephesus.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to similarities between John and the Odes of Solomon, which they think came from Syria. As there are also some resemblances in the language of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, this is held to show that John was written in Syria, probably at Antioch. Others again think that Egypt was the place, and they support this by pointing out that the oldest fragment of a manuscript of this Gospel was found there. There is no real evidence, and we are left with probabilities. There is much to be said for accepting the evidence of Irenaeus and seeing Ephesus as the place of origin, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>There is no real indication of the intended destination. From 20:31 we learn that the book was written that the readers might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and that by believing they might have life. The Gospel, then, has an evangelistic aim. But it is also possible that “believe” means “keep on believing”—“go on in faith,” rather than “begin to believe.” That is to say, the book may have been meant from the beginning to build people up in the faith. Probably we should not distinguish between these aims too sharply. Both may well be in mind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Several possible backgrounds to the Gospel have been suggested. The Greek interest is obvious, and this writing has sometimes been called the Gospel of the Hellenists. The suggestion is that we should look to Greek writings, perhaps the works of the philosophers or Philo of Alexandria, to find the right background against which to understand what John has written. This approach may be seen in the work of Rudolf Bultmann, who thought specifically of Gnosticism. Indeed, for Bultmann one of the sources of this Gospel was a discourse source that he thought was taken from non-Christian Gnosticism. Not many have been prepared to follow Bultmann, but a number of recent commentators have discerned some form of Gnosticism as the backdrop to John.<\/p>\n<p>While such views are put forward seriously, there are some substantial objections. One is that, despite the confident assertions of some scholars, Gnosticism has never been shown to be earlier than Christianity. In the form in which it comes before us in history, it is a Christian heresy, and of course, the Christian faith must appear before a Christian heresy is possible. Another objection is that there is a basic difference between the two systems. Gnosticism is concerned with knowledge (the very word is derived from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>,<\/em> “knowledge”). Its “redeemer” is one who comes from heaven with knowledge. But John does not subscribe to the view that man is saved by knowledge. The Redeemer comes to take away the sin of the world (1:29). Gnosticism tells people that life is an upward struggle; Christianity tells of a Savior who came down to raise them up. It is not easy to see any form of Gnosticism as the essential background to Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Much more significant is John’s Semitic background. Especially important here is the OT, accepted as sacred Scripture by Jew and Christian alike. It lies constantly behind John’s statements, and it must be studied carefully if John is to be understood. It is plain that John knew and loved the Septuagint, the translation into Greek of the Hebrew OT. Again and again, the Septuagint can be shown to lie behind what John says.<\/p>\n<p>In modern times important discoveries have been made at Qumran, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. Among the scrolls unearthed in the caves of this area are several that have affinities with John. Indeed, one of the interesting facts about the scrolls is that they have more parallels with John than with any other part of the NT, a fact difficult to explain if John was written late and at a distance from Palestine. The resemblances to the Qumran writings must be viewed with care, for there is often a linguistic resemblance where the thinking is quite different. For example, both use the unusual expression “the Spirit of truth.” But where John means one of the persons of the Trinity, the scrolls speak of “a spirit of truth” and “a spirit of error” striving in the souls of people. The connection is real, but John is clearly not dependent on the scrolls for his thinking. The contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they afford additional evidence that this Gospel is basically Palestinian and must be understood against a background of first-century Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Other backgrounds have been suggested, such as the Hermetic literature. This is a group of writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus (“Hermes Thrice-greatest”), a designation of the Egyptian god Thoth. There are indeed some points of contact with John, but they are few in comparison with those of writings rooted in Palestine. It is difficult to take such suggestions seriously. John is essentially Palestinian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The writer told us that Jesus did many “signs” (or miracles) that he had not recorded, but “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life” (Jn 20:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). John wrote to show that Jesus is the Messiah. But he did not do this simply with a view to conveying interesting information. He wanted his readers to see this knowledge as a challenge to faith; when they believe, they will have life. John sought to bring men and women to Christ; he had an evangelistic aim. That does not exhaust what he was trying to do, for his words have meaning for believers. It is important that believers have a right knowledge of Jesus and that they continue to believe.<\/p>\n<p>The main theological teaching of this Gospel, then, is that God has sent his Messiah, Jesus. He is the very Son of God, and he comes to bring life (3:16). Though Jesus told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, this is not often said so specifically. The avoidance of the term might well be because of the political overtones it had acquired among the Jews at large. They looked for a Messiah who would fight the Romans. He would defeat them and set up a mighty world empire with its capital in Jerusalem. Jesus was not aiming at anything like that, and it was important that he avoid the kind of language that would give that impression. But though the conventional messianic terminology is avoided, John left no doubt that Jesus was God’s chosen one. Again and again he depicted Jesus as fulfilling messianic functions. For example, in the long discourse in chapter 6 we see Jesus as the bread from heaven, fulfilling the expectation that when Messiah came, he would renew the manna; and in the giving of sight to the blind man (ch 9) we have another messianic function (cf. Is 35:5).<\/p>\n<p>With this greatness of Jesus, John also combined teaching about his lowliness. A continuing, though unobtrusive, strand of Johannine teaching is that Jesus depends on the Father for everything. Apart from the Father, Jesus said, he could do nothing (Jn 5:30). His very food is to do the Father’s will (4:34). He lives through the Father (6:57). It is the Father who gives him his disciples (6:37, 44; 17:6). It is the Father who bears witness to him (5:32, 37). John insists that Jesus is in no sense independent of the Father. In the mission of Jesus, John sees the working out of the purpose of the Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue and Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>John begins with a prologue (1:1-18) that is unlike anything in any of the other Gospels. In it he refers to Jesus as “the Word,” a term that has points of contact with both Greek and Hebrew thinking. As John uses it, it conveys the thought that Jesus is the expression of the mind of the Father. John speaks of the Word as God (1:1), sees him as active in creation (1:3-5), goes on to the witness borne to him by John the Baptist (1:6-8), speaks of the coming of the Word into the world (1:9-14), and finishes with a section on the greatness of the Word (1:15-18). In this prologue he briefly introduces some of the great themes that will be developed throughout the Gospel. It is a majestic introduction to the whole.<\/p>\n<p>Next we have the beginnings of Jesus’ public ministry (1:19-51). Jesus’ work was preceded by that of John the Baptist, and the Evangelist tells us first about the kind of witness that the Baptist gave to Jesus. Witness is one of his important concepts, and witness is all that John the Baptist does in this Gospel. From this witness we move to the way the first disciples came to Jesus. We learn something of how Andrew and Peter came to know the Lord. We read also of Philip and Nathanael, of whom we learn little or nothing in the other Gospels.<\/p>\n<h5>The Signs and Discourses (2:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The public ministry of Jesus is described in a very distinctive way in this Gospel. John has a long section (chs 2–12) in which he tells of a number of miracles Jesus did, interweaving into his account a series of discourses. Sometimes these are addresses given to groups of people, and sometimes they are talks with individuals. Some scholars call this section of the Gospel the Book of Signs, thus emphasizing the prominent place given to seven miracles. For John they are not simply wonders. They are meaningful; in the literal sense of the term they are <em>sign<\/em>ificant.<\/p>\n<p>The first of them is the turning of the water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee (2:1-11). The water in question is connected with Jewish rites of purification (v 6), and the story is surely to teach us that Jesus transforms life. He changes the water of the law into the wine of the gospel. As a result of this “sign,” his disciples believed in him (v 11). John went on to tell how Jesus went up to Jerusalem and drove the traders out of the temple. They were selling animals for sacrifice and changing money. But their business was being done in the Court of the Gentiles, the only place in the temple where a Gentile could come to meditate and pray.<\/p>\n<p>The first discourse is on the new birth (3:1-21). Jesus talked with Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, about the necessity for radical renewal if one is to enter the kingdom. Jesus was speaking of God’s regenerating activity, not some human reformation. Following this, John records a dispute between some of John’s disciples with a Jew on the subject of purification. This opens the way for a section that shows the superiority of Jesus over John the Baptist—by the Baptist’s own confession (3:22-36).<\/p>\n<p>The second discourse is really a long conversation Jesus had with the woman of Samaria, whom he met by a well (4:1-42). It turns on “the water of life,” a term that is not fully explained in this chapter but which we later find points to the life-giving Spirit (7:38-39). This leads to the story of the second sign, the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54), notable for the fact that Jesus healed at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>The third sign is the healing of the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (5:1-18). This man had spent many years waiting for healing at the moving of the water. Jesus told him to get up and walk, and he did. Because it was done on a Sabbath, the Pharisees objected. This leads to Jesus’ third discourse, that on the divine Son (5:19-47). Here the closeness of the relationship of Jesus to the Father is stressed, and his place in the judgment is brought out. There is emphasis also on the variety of witness who encountered Jesus, which shows how reasonable it is to accept him as God’s own Son.<\/p>\n<p>John’s fourth sign is the one miracle (apart from the resurrection) found in all four Gospels: the feeding of the 5,000 (6:1-15). It is followed by Jesus’ walking on water (vv 16-21), which seems to be meant as the fifth sign (though some scholars think not; if they are right, there are only six signs). Then comes the fourth discourse, the great sermon on the bread of life (vv 22-59). Jesus is this bread, which he gives to all men and women who believe in him. There are references to eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv 50-58), which point to his death. Some have seen in them a reference to Communion, but it is hard to see why Jesus should refer in this way to an as-yet-nonexistent sacrament. Moreover, much the same effect is attributed in the same discourse to believing (vv 35, 47). It seems best to understand Jesus as meaning that people must believe in him as the one who would die for them in order for them to have life.<\/p>\n<p>There is a section detailing Peter’s affirmation of loyalty in the face of some who drifted away from the Master (6:67-71). Then we come to the fifth discourse, on the life-giving Spirit (7:1-52). John has an important explanatory point of his own when he tells us that at the time the Spirit had not been given because Jesus had not yet been glorified (v 39). The fullness of the Spirit depends on the completion of the work of Christ in his death and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The sixth discourse tells of the light of the world (8:12-59). This aspect of Jesus’ person and ministry is dramatically brought out in the sixth sign, the healing of the man born blind (ch 9). It is a lively narrative, as the healed man conducts a spirited defense against the Pharisees who belittled Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most beautiful of all the illustrations of Jesus’ relations to his people is that on which he dwells in the seventh discourse, where he speaks of himself as the good shepherd (ch 10). There is the obvious truth that sheep depend entirely on their shepherd, but Jesus says something else. Whereas earthly shepherds live to meet the needs of their sheep, Jesus laid down his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The final sign is the raising of Lazarus (11:1-44), a man who had been dead for four days. The story graphically brings out Jesus’ power over death and his readiness to confer the gift of life. Jesus speaks of himself as “the resurrection and the life” (v 25); death cannot defeat him. He brings life to the dead, to the spiritually dead as well as to physically dead Lazarus. John goes on to note the reaction to this miracle: some believed, but some opposed Jesus (vv 45-57). He includes a notable saying of Caiaphas, the high priest, that one man should die for the people (vv 50-52). Caiaphas was speaking as a cynical politician (better one dead, however innocent, than the whole nation be troubled). But John saw in the words the deeper meaning that Jesus’ death would bring salvation to many.<\/p>\n<p>John rounds off his account of the ministry with the story of the anointing of Jesus by a woman in Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the coming of some Greeks to Jesus, and his final summary of what he had taught (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Last Supper<\/h5>\n<p>The account of what went on in the upper room on the night before the Crucifixion is the fullest of all the four Gospels. Curiously, John says nothing about the institution of Communion, a fact that has never been satisfactorily explained. But he tells us how Jesus washed the feet of the disciples (13:1-17), an action splendidly exemplifying the spirit of lowly service so soon to be shown on the cross. Then comes the prophecy of the betrayal, an action that set in motion the events that would lead to the cross (vv 18-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the long discourse that follows, Jesus dealt with some questions posed by his followers and went on to teach them some important truths, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). He develops the thought that he is the true vine, the disciples being vitally joined to him as branches to the vine. It is important for the branches to remain in the vine if they are to have life (15:1-16). Then come some words about suffering that would be of help to them in times of persecution (vv 17-25). Jesus goes on to speak about the Holy Spirit (15:26–16:15). This is a very important passage, for it contains much more about the Spirit than we find elsewhere in Jesus’ words. Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete,” a title not easy to understand. It is in origin a legal term, and at least we can say that it indicates that the Spirit brings friendship, encouragement, and help. Jesus went on to speak of his approaching departure from the disciples and to prepare them for the trying time ahead (16:16-33). This part of the Gospel concludes with Jesus’ great High Priestly prayer. He prayed for the disciples to be one, as he commended them to the care of the heavenly Father (ch 17).<\/p>\n<h5>The Cross and Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, he went forward to meet them and they fell to the ground (18:1-11). He gave himself over to them; they did not take him over. At the outset of his passion narrative, John was making the point that Jesus is sovereign. He was not being defeated by the march of events but was sovereignly doing the will of the Father. John is the only one to tell us that Jesus was taken before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, the reigning high priest (18:12-14, 19-24). He tells also of Peter’s three denials of Jesus (vv 15-27). He did not spend much time on the Jewish trial, but he was much more explicit than the other Evangelists in his account of the Roman trial. Clearly, he had some special knowledge of what went on before Pilate. He presents a magnificent picture of Jesus talking with Pilate about kingship—the Son of God discussing with the representative of Caesar the meaning of sovereignty (vv 33-40).<\/p>\n<p>In his account of the Crucifixion John has a number of touches of his own, notably the way Jesus commended Mary to the care of the beloved disciple (19:26-27), the fact that the cry Jesus uttered as he died was “It is finished” (v 30), and the piercing of his side by a soldier’s spear (vv 31-37).<\/p>\n<p>John proceeds to the narrative of the burial (vv 38-42) and of the empty tomb (20:1-10). He speaks of appearances of the risen Lord to Mary Magdalene (vv 11-18), and to the disciples—both without (vv 19-23) and with Thomas (vv 24-29).<\/p>\n<p>The final chapter, an epilogue, tells of a miraculous catch of fish (21:1-14) and goes on to the moving account of Peter’s threefold declaration of love to Jesus and his restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOHN, Gospel of The fourth Gospel. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospe...","summary_en":"JOHN, Gospel of The fourth Gospel. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospe...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":23301,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Light","title_en":"Light","content_ro":"<h3>LIGHT<\/h3>\n<p>Illumination that makes sight possible.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Light is a many-sided concept in the OT. The term is often used of ordinary, sensible light, but it also speaks of communicating spiritual truth. Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gn 1:3). God also made individual lights such as the sun, moon, and stars (v 16). Sometimes light is personified, as when its inaccessibility is indicated by saying that it is impossible to reach the place where it lives (Jb 38:19; cf. v 24). There are also manufactured light sources, such as those used in the tabernacle (Ex 25:37).<\/p>\n<p>Light is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting, or what is associated with important people and more especially with God. “Light is pleasant,” says the preacher (Eccl 11:7). During one of the plagues in Egypt, the Egyptians were in thick darkness while the Israelites had light (Ex 10:23). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led in the wilderness by a pillar of cloud by day and of fire by night (13:21). The pillar gave them light when their enemies were in darkness (14:20). In later days Israel remembered that God did not abandon his people even when they sinned; the pillar of fire was always there to show them the right way (Neh 9:19; cf. Neh 9:12; Pss 78:14; 105:39).<\/p>\n<p>Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord. Job said, “He floods the darkness with light; he brings light to the deepest gloom” (Jb 12:22, <span>nlt<\/span>). In his time of trouble Job recalled earlier, better days: “I long for the years gone by when God took care of me, when he lighted the way before me and I walked safely through the darkness” (Jb 29:2-3, <span>nlt<\/span>). Similarly Eliphaz pictured the happiness that would befall Job if he would take Eliphaz’s advice: “Whatever you decide to do will be accomplished, and light will shine on the road ahead of you” (Jb 22:28, <span>nlt<\/span>). Eliphaz’s use of that expression shows what is commonly conveyed in his day. The psalmist counted it a blessing when God himself lighted his lamp (Pss 18:28; 118:27; cf. 97:11; 112:4).<\/p>\n<p>Light is closely linked with God; indeed, God can be said to be light: “No longer will you need the sun or moon to give you light, for the <span>Lord<\/span> your God will be your everlasting light, and he will be your glory. The sun will never set; the moon will not go down. For the <span>Lord<\/span> will be your everlasting light” (Is 60:19-20, <span>nlt<\/span>). The psalmist exulted, “The <span>Lord<\/span> is my light and my salvation” (Ps 27:1). God is said to be robed with light (104:2), and light dwells with him (Dn 2:22). Darkness is no problem to God; darkness and light are alike to him (Ps 139:12). Micah saw God as light and also as bringing his servants into the light (Mi 7:8-9). Both are ways of affirming that there is blessing and victory with God, so that a servant of God need never be dismayed.<\/p>\n<p>God’s blessing, described in terms of light, is also related to “the light of his presence.” Something of that expression’s meaning is seen from its use in Psalm 4:6: “Many people say, ‘Who will show us better times?’ Let the smile of your face shine on us, <span>Lord<\/span>” (<span>nlt<\/span>). The parallelism shows that “good” and the lifting up of the light of God’s countenance are much the same. Similarly, it was the light of God’s countenance that brought victory (Ps 44:3; here it is linked with God’s right hand and arm and his delight in his people). Those who walk in the light of God’s countenance are blessed (89:15). There is another side to that expression, for secret sins are exposed in his light (90:8). There is a close scrutiny from which no one and nothing can escape. But the predominant idea is that of the blessing that follows from God’s looking upon his people. On one occasion the phrase is used of a person showing favor to others (Jb 29:24). An extension of the Lord’s blessing is the light God gives to the world through his servants (Is 42:6; 49:6). God’s servants can guide others to the revelation and blessing of God.<\/p>\n<p>Light is associated with justice when the Lord says, “A law will go forth from me, and my justice for a light to the peoples” (Is 51:4, <span>rsv<\/span>). God’s light in that act of justice is a consuming fire. Sometimes light is connected with good behavior: “The path of the righteous is like the light of dawn, which shines brighter and brighter until full day” (Prv 4:18, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The OT uses the absence of light as a synonym for disaster. There are those who grope in the dark without light (Jb 12:25). Bildad saw the light of the wicked put out in punishment and death (18:5-17). The wicked will be “thrust from light into darkness” (v 18). In the aftermath of the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem there came the lament “He has brought me into deep darkness, shutting out all light” (Lam 3:2, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>New Testament references to light are often figurative. Thus, on the Damascus road, Saul of Tarsus encountered “a light from heaven” (Acts 9:3; cf. 22:6-11; 26:13). Was that light as we know it or something else? Likewise, what quality of light shone in the apostle Peter’s cell (12:7)? The light in the heavenly city is not the kind of illumination seen on earth, “for the Lord God will be their light” (Rv 22:5; cf. 21:11, 23-24).<\/p>\n<p>The association of God with light is recurrent in the NT. The apostle John wrote that “God is light and there is no darkness in him at all” (1 Jn 1:5, <span>nlt<\/span>). The apostle James referred to God as “the Father of lights” (Jas 1:17). Or God may be thought of as living in light, light that no person can approach (1 Tm 6:16; cf. 1 Jn 1:7). Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (Jn 8:12; see also 9:5), and “I have come as light into the world, that whoever believes in me may not remain in darkness” (Jn 12:46, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus told his followers to believe in the light while it was with them (v 35). Such passages emphasize that Christ brought a revelation from God, but he was more than a revealer. He was himself that revelation, according to the apostle John (Jn 1:1-10). John the Baptist came to bear witness to the light for the purpose of bringing people to believe (vv 7-8). Those who received Jesus, who believed in the light, received the right to become children of God (vv 9-12). Sometimes light is used to express the illumination that happens when people come to the knowledge of God and his salvation (Mt 4:16; Lk 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18).<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps thinking of a then-popular concept of a war between light and darkness, John wrote that the light shines in the darkness and adds that the darkness has not overcome it (Jn 1:5; cf. 1 Jn 2:8). John tells us that “the light from heaven came into the world, but they loved the darkness more than the light, for their actions were evil” (Jn 3:19, <span>nlt<\/span>). To love darkness brings condemnation, now and at the final judgment. John pointed out that evildoers keep away from the light; they do not want their evil exposed. But those who “do the truth” come to the light (vv 20-21). In John’s account of the raising of Lazarus, Jesus speaks of the possibility of walking without stumbling in the light of day, but then he goes on to the way a man stumbles in the night because he has no light (11:10). The lack of light “in” the man shows that it is a spiritual process with which Jesus is concerned and not with making physical progress by daylight. He who follows Jesus will have the light of life (8:12), which indicates what Jesus has in mind.<\/p>\n<p>Those who respond to the light may be characterized as “sons of light” (Jn 12:36). Their allegiance is to the light and their conduct has been shaped by this fact. The concept is not confined to John’s Gospel, for we also see it in Luke (Lk 16:8). We find it in Paul’s affirmation that the Thessalonian Christians are children of light and of the day, not of the night or darkness (1 Thes 5:5). John speaks of walking in the light (1 Jn 1:7) and sees the conduct of the Christian as aptly symbolized by light.<\/p>\n<p>This way of looking at the Christian’s manner of life reaches its high point in the words of Jesus to his followers: “You are the light of the world” (Mt 5:14), thus applying to them words that are also applied to himself. Of course, we are not the world’s light in the same sense as he is. When light refers to Christ, there is a reference to him as Savior and not merely as one who reveals great truths. When believers are called the light of the world, there is clearly no saving significance in the description: they do not accomplish the world’s salvation. But they do point it out. It is their function to live as redeemed people. They are to show the quality of life proper to the people of God and in this way act as light to the people of the world. They are to let their light shine before the world in such a way that people will see their good deeds and so come to praise God (not, be it noted, those who do the deeds, Mt 5:16). It is important for those in this position to make full use of the light they have. It is tragic when the light that is in them is darkness (Mt 6:23; Lk 11:35).<\/p>\n<p>This metaphor is worked out in a way not congenial to modern men and women, but the basic lesson is clear. Christians have been illuminated by the light that is Christ, who dwells within his people. If they ignore the illumination he brings and live like those in the dark, then indeed they are in deep darkness. They are worse than others because they know what light is and what it can mean to them, and have turned away from it.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Darkness.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LIGHT<\/h3>\n<p>Illumination that makes sight possible.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Light is a many-sided concept in the OT. The term is often used of ordinary, sensible light, but it also speaks of communicating spiritual truth. Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gn 1:3). God also made individual lights such as the sun, moon, and stars (v 16). Sometimes light is personified, as when its inaccessibility is indicated by saying that it is impossible to reach the place where it lives (Jb 38:19; cf. v 24). There are also manufactured light sources, such as those used in the tabernacle (Ex 25:37).<\/p>\n<p>Light is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting, or what is associated with important people and more especially with God. “Light is pleasant,” says the preacher (Eccl 11:7). During one of the plagues in Egypt, the Egyptians were in thick darkness while the Israelites had light (Ex 10:23). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led in the wilderness by a pillar of cloud by day and of fire by night (13:21). The pillar gave them light when their enemies were in darkness (14:20). In later days Israel remembered that God did not abandon his people even when they sinned; the pillar of fire was always there to show them the right way (Neh 9:19; cf. Neh 9:12; Pss 78:14; 105:39).<\/p>\n<p>Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord. Job said, “He floods the darkness with light; he brings light to the deepest gloom” (Jb 12:22, <span>nlt<\/span>). In his time of trouble Job recalled earlier, better days: “I long for the years gone by when God took care of me, when he lighted the way before me and I walked safely through the darkness” (Jb 29:2-3, <span>nlt<\/span>). Similarly Eliphaz pictured the happiness that would befall Job if he would take Eliphaz’s advice: “Whatever you decide to do will be accomplished, and light will shine on the road ahead of you” (Jb 22:28, <span>nlt<\/span>). Eliphaz’s use of that expression shows what is commonly conveyed in his day. The psalmist counted it a blessing when God himself lighted his lamp (Pss 18:28; 118:27; cf. 97:11; 112:4).<\/p>\n<p>Light is closely linked with God; indeed, God can be said to be light: “No longer will you need the sun or moon to give you light, for the <span>Lord<\/span> your God will be your everlasting light, and he will be your glory. The sun will never set; the moon will not go down. For the <span>Lord<\/span> will be your everlasting light” (Is 60:19-20, <span>nlt<\/span>). The psalmist exulted, “The <span>Lord<\/span> is my light and my salvation” (Ps 27:1). God is said to be robed with light (104:2), and light dwells with him (Dn 2:22). Darkness is no problem to God; darkness and light are alike to him (Ps 139:12). Micah saw God as light and also as bringing his servants into the light (Mi 7:8-9). Both are ways of affirming that there is blessing and victory with God, so that a servant of God need never be dismayed.<\/p>\n<p>God’s blessing, described in terms of light, is also related to “the light of his presence.” Something of that expression’s meaning is seen from its use in Psalm 4:6: “Many people say, ‘Who will show us better times?’ Let the smile of your face shine on us, <span>Lord<\/span>” (<span>nlt<\/span>). The parallelism shows that “good” and the lifting up of the light of God’s countenance are much the same. Similarly, it was the light of God’s countenance that brought victory (Ps 44:3; here it is linked with God’s right hand and arm and his delight in his people). Those who walk in the light of God’s countenance are blessed (89:15). There is another side to that expression, for secret sins are exposed in his light (90:8). There is a close scrutiny from which no one and nothing can escape. But the predominant idea is that of the blessing that follows from God’s looking upon his people. On one occasion the phrase is used of a person showing favor to others (Jb 29:24). An extension of the Lord’s blessing is the light God gives to the world through his servants (Is 42:6; 49:6). God’s servants can guide others to the revelation and blessing of God.<\/p>\n<p>Light is associated with justice when the Lord says, “A law will go forth from me, and my justice for a light to the peoples” (Is 51:4, <span>rsv<\/span>). God’s light in that act of justice is a consuming fire. Sometimes light is connected with good behavior: “The path of the righteous is like the light of dawn, which shines brighter and brighter until full day” (Prv 4:18, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The OT uses the absence of light as a synonym for disaster. There are those who grope in the dark without light (Jb 12:25). Bildad saw the light of the wicked put out in punishment and death (18:5-17). The wicked will be “thrust from light into darkness” (v 18). In the aftermath of the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem there came the lament “He has brought me into deep darkness, shutting out all light” (Lam 3:2, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>New Testament references to light are often figurative. Thus, on the Damascus road, Saul of Tarsus encountered “a light from heaven” (Acts 9:3; cf. 22:6-11; 26:13). Was that light as we know it or something else? Likewise, what quality of light shone in the apostle Peter’s cell (12:7)? The light in the heavenly city is not the kind of illumination seen on earth, “for the Lord God will be their light” (Rv 22:5; cf. 21:11, 23-24).<\/p>\n<p>The association of God with light is recurrent in the NT. The apostle John wrote that “God is light and there is no darkness in him at all” (1 Jn 1:5, <span>nlt<\/span>). The apostle James referred to God as “the Father of lights” (Jas 1:17). Or God may be thought of as living in light, light that no person can approach (1 Tm 6:16; cf. 1 Jn 1:7). Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (Jn 8:12; see also 9:5), and “I have come as light into the world, that whoever believes in me may not remain in darkness” (Jn 12:46, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus told his followers to believe in the light while it was with them (v 35). Such passages emphasize that Christ brought a revelation from God, but he was more than a revealer. He was himself that revelation, according to the apostle John (Jn 1:1-10). John the Baptist came to bear witness to the light for the purpose of bringing people to believe (vv 7-8). Those who received Jesus, who believed in the light, received the right to become children of God (vv 9-12). Sometimes light is used to express the illumination that happens when people come to the knowledge of God and his salvation (Mt 4:16; Lk 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18).<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps thinking of a then-popular concept of a war between light and darkness, John wrote that the light shines in the darkness and adds that the darkness has not overcome it (Jn 1:5; cf. 1 Jn 2:8). John tells us that “the light from heaven came into the world, but they loved the darkness more than the light, for their actions were evil” (Jn 3:19, <span>nlt<\/span>). To love darkness brings condemnation, now and at the final judgment. John pointed out that evildoers keep away from the light; they do not want their evil exposed. But those who “do the truth” come to the light (vv 20-21). In John’s account of the raising of Lazarus, Jesus speaks of the possibility of walking without stumbling in the light of day, but then he goes on to the way a man stumbles in the night because he has no light (11:10). The lack of light “in” the man shows that it is a spiritual process with which Jesus is concerned and not with making physical progress by daylight. He who follows Jesus will have the light of life (8:12), which indicates what Jesus has in mind.<\/p>\n<p>Those who respond to the light may be characterized as “sons of light” (Jn 12:36). Their allegiance is to the light and their conduct has been shaped by this fact. The concept is not confined to John’s Gospel, for we also see it in Luke (Lk 16:8). We find it in Paul’s affirmation that the Thessalonian Christians are children of light and of the day, not of the night or darkness (1 Thes 5:5). John speaks of walking in the light (1 Jn 1:7) and sees the conduct of the Christian as aptly symbolized by light.<\/p>\n<p>This way of looking at the Christian’s manner of life reaches its high point in the words of Jesus to his followers: “You are the light of the world” (Mt 5:14), thus applying to them words that are also applied to himself. Of course, we are not the world’s light in the same sense as he is. When light refers to Christ, there is a reference to him as Savior and not merely as one who reveals great truths. When believers are called the light of the world, there is clearly no saving significance in the description: they do not accomplish the world’s salvation. But they do point it out. It is their function to live as redeemed people. They are to show the quality of life proper to the people of God and in this way act as light to the people of the world. They are to let their light shine before the world in such a way that people will see their good deeds and so come to praise God (not, be it noted, those who do the deeds, Mt 5:16). It is important for those in this position to make full use of the light they have. It is tragic when the light that is in them is darkness (Mt 6:23; Lk 11:35).<\/p>\n<p>This metaphor is worked out in a way not congenial to modern men and women, but the basic lesson is clear. Christians have been illuminated by the light that is Christ, who dwells within his people. If they ignore the illumination he brings and live like those in the dark, then indeed they are in deep darkness. They are worse than others because they know what light is and what it can mean to them, and have turned away from it.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Darkness.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LIGHT Illumination that makes sight possible. In the Old Testament Light is a many-sided concept in the OT. The term is often used of ordinary, sensible light, but it also speaks of communicating spiritual truth. Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gn 1:3). God also made individual lights such as the sun, moon, and stars (v 16). Sometimes light is personified, as when its inaccessibility is indicated by saying that it is impossible to reach the place where it li...","summary_en":"LIGHT Illumination that makes sight possible. In the Old Testament Light is a many-sided concept in the OT. The term is often used of ordinary, sensible light, but it also speaks of communicating spiritual truth. Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gn 1:3). God also made individual lights such as the sun, moon, and stars (v 16). Sometimes light is personified, as when its inaccessibility is indicated by saying that it is impossible to reach the place where it li...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":23368,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Logos*","title_en":"Logos*","content_ro":"<h3>LOGOS*<\/h3>\n<p>English transliteration of a Greek term for “word.” The term is significant because in John’s writings it refers to Jesus. The prologue of John’s Gospel (Jn 1:1, 14) and the beginning of 1 John (1 Jn 1:1) use <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> to show how Jesus can be God and yet be an expression of God in the world. The divine Word took on human form and became a historical personage. Logos is also the title of Christ in the vision of his divine glory (Rv 19:13). Writers outside the NT, such as Philo of Alexandria, used the term but with a different meaning.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, Gospel of; Word, Word of God.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LOGOS*<\/h3>\n<p>English transliteration of a Greek term for “word.” The term is significant because in John’s writings it refers to Jesus. The prologue of John’s Gospel (Jn 1:1, 14) and the beginning of 1 John (1 Jn 1:1) use <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> to show how Jesus can be God and yet be an expression of God in the world. The divine Word took on human form and became a historical personage. Logos is also the title of Christ in the vision of his divine glory (Rv 19:13). Writers outside the NT, such as Philo of Alexandria, used the term but with a different meaning.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, Gospel of; Word, Word of God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LOGOS* English transliteration of a Greek term for “word.” The term is significant because in John’s writings it refers to Jesus. The prologue of John’s Gospel (Jn 1:1, 14) and the beginning of 1 John (1 Jn 1:1) use logos to show how Jesus can be God and yet be an expression of God in the world. The divine Word took on human form and became a historical personage. Logos is also the title of Christ in the vision of his divine glory (Rv 19:13). Writers outside the NT, such as Philo of Alexandri...","summary_en":"LOGOS* English transliteration of a Greek term for “word.” The term is significant because in John’s writings it refers to Jesus. The prologue of John’s Gospel (Jn 1:1, 14) and the beginning of 1 John (1 Jn 1:1) use logos to show how Jesus can be God and yet be an expression of God in the world. The divine Word took on human form and became a historical personage. Logos is also the title of Christ in the vision of his divine glory (Rv 19:13). Writers outside the NT, such as Philo of Alexandri...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":25439,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Messiah","title_en":"Messiah","content_ro":"<h3>MESSIAH<\/h3>\n<p>Title derived from the Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiach<\/span><em>,<\/em> a verbal adjective meaning “anointed one.” Along with its NT equivalent, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> (Christ), it refers to an act of consecration whereby an individual is set apart to serve God and then anointed with oil. The verbal root <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashach<\/span><em>)<\/em> conveys this idea as well.<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s practice of ceremonially anointing with oil is present in several contexts. Priests were regularly anointed prior to their divinely given service at the altar of sacrifice (Lv 4:3). While there is evidence for a literal anointing of prophets (1 Kgs 19:16), this does not appear to have been a standard practice. The anointing of Saul and David by Samuel established the act as a significant prerequisite for Hebrew kings before they assumed their positions of royal leadership. The king was especially considered to be the Lord’s anointed and as such was viewed to hold a secure position before men (1 Sm 12:14; 2 Sm 19:21) and God (Pss 2:2; 20:6). Along with numerous messianic prophecies, these proceedings helped inform the Jews of the Anointed One, par excellence, who would eventually come to bring salvation to Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Concluding the 13 articles of Hebraic faith attributed to Moses Maimonides (13th century <span>AD<\/span>) is the statement still found in many Hebrew prayer books: “I believe with a perfect heart that the Messiah will come; and although his coming be delayed, I will still wait patiently for his speedy appearance.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MessiahintheOldTestament\">Messiah in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Jewish hope for the advent of the Messiah developed dynamically from the period of David’s reign, when it was prophesied that his kingdom would endure to the end of time (2 Sm 7:16). Israel was told that, through David’s descendants, his throne would exert a never-ending dominion over all the earth (2 Sm 22:48-51; Jer 33). It is with this aspect of messianic salvation that Jewish minds have traditionally been preoccupied (cf. Acts 1:6).<\/p>\n<p>Among Orthodox rabbis there has never been a lack of conjecture respecting the details of the Messiah’s ministry. At one time the rabbis applied no less than 456 passages of Scripture to his person and salvation. Preoccupation with the Messiah is evident in the tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> (Babylonian Talmud), where passages state that the world was created for him and that all the prophets prophesied of his days (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 98b, 99a). By and large, Orthodoxy still retains its time-worn belief in the Messiah’s reign in Jerusalem, the rebuilding of the temple, and the reestablishment of both priesthood and sacrifice.<\/p>\n<p>While later Judaism looked for the Messiah as an eschatological figure who will reign at the end of time, modern Jewish thought has largely jettisoned the traditional notion of a personal Messiah in favor of belief in a messianic age. Prevalent liberal Judaism envisions the world ultimately perfected through the influence of the twin Judaic ideals of justice and compassion. Such conviction, ignoring the plight of fallen humans and the teaching of Scripture, substitutes humanistic thinking for miraculous heavenly intervention.<\/p>\n<p>While the Messiah’s origin is linked firmly to the house of David (2 Sm 7:14; Hos 3:5), the promise for a Messiah was given long before David lived. In fact, the hope for the Messiah is implicit in the first promise of the establishment of the kingdom of God. Addressed to Satan, Genesis 3:15 declares that God will place hostility between the serpent and the woman until, in the fullness of time, the “seed” of the woman inflicts a fatal blow to the head of the serpent.<\/p>\n<p>The nature of messianic prophecy is progressive; each prophecy casts more light on the subject. This occurs, for example, respecting the concept of the “seed”: Messiah is to be born of a woman (Gn 3:15), through the line of Shem (9:26) and specifically through Abraham (22:18). Yet even as late as Genesis 22:18, the “seed” is not clearly presented as a person, since <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">zerah<\/span> (seed) may indicate a singular or plural object. Still less apparent in these early stages of messianic prophecy is the nature of the “bruising” that is to occur. Yet the idea of the Messiah being crushed for sin is implicit in the Genesis pronouncement, as is the violence associated with that act. Chief among the messianic prophets, Isaiah gives full range to the axiom that the Anointed One must endure extensive suffering (Is 53:1). Under the figure “the Servant of the Lord,” four “servant songs” delineate the mission of the future deliverer (Is 42:1-7; 49:1-9; 50:4-11; 52:13–53:12). While it is true that Isaiah does not explicitly link the title Messiah with the Servant of the Lord, identifying both figures as one and the same person is justifiable. Both figures are uniquely anointed (61:1); each brings light to the Gentiles (55:4; cf. 49:6); neither is pretentious in his first appearance (7:14-15; 11:1; cf. 42:3; 53:1); and the title of Davidic “branch” rests upon them both (11:1-4). Equally significant are the dual facts of their humiliation and exaltation (49:7; 52:13-15). Jewish scholars of the early Christian era in the Aramaic Targum on the prophets paraphrase Isaiah 42:1, “Behold my Servant Messiah” and begin Isaiah 53, “Behold my Servant Messiah will prosper.” While Cyrus may be spoken of as “anointed,” no final salvific work is attributed to him (45:1-5). Israel, although elect and loved by God (41:8), is ill-equipped as God’s servant to bring his redeeming work to mankind (42:18). The collapse of David’s dynasty points eloquently to Israel’s need for an anointed monarch who will heal the apostasy and disobedience (Ex 33:5; Hos 4:1). More and more, OT history presents Israel’s comprehensive moral failure. Her problem, which she shares with mankind, can only be solved by the making of a covenant whose surety and focal point is both a personal Savior and sovereign Lord (Jer 31:31-34). The advent of such a champion lives in the recorded promise of a shoot from the stump of Jesse’s fallen tree, who will bring the light of life to God’s benighted people (Is 9:2; 11:1).<\/p>\n<p>It is difficult to get away from the idea that the concept of servanthood and lowliness belongs within the sphere of royalty (Zec 9:9). The concept of the Messiah filling the complementary offices of priest and king is incontrovertible (Ps 110:1-4); a suffering priest-king is far less obvious. Some among the Talmudic writers apparently recognized the likelihood that the Messiah would have to suffer. In the Babylonian Talmud, tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 98b, the Messiah is said to bear sicknesses and pain. Among the prayers for the Day of Atonement may be found the words of Eleazar ben Qalir (perhaps as late as <span>AD<\/span> 1000): “Our righteous Messiah has departed from us; we are horror-stricken, and there is none to justify us. Our iniquities and the yoke of our transgressions he carries, and is wounded for our transgressions. He bears on his shoulders our sins to find pardon for our iniquities. May we be healed by his stripes.” In a similar vein Rabbi Eliyya de Vidas writes, “The meaning of ‘He was wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities,’ is that since the Messiah bears our iniquities, which produce the effect of His being bruised, it follows that whosoever will not admit that the Messiah thus suffers for our iniquities must endure and suffer for them himself.” For all this, it is highly doubtful that anyone imagined the Messiah would accomplish his salvational work by means of his own death (cf. Is 53:12). When rabbinic speculation failed to satisfactorily harmonize the paradoxical facts of humiliation and exaltation, some hypothesized that God would send a Messiah to suffer as well as a Messiah to reign. Biblically, it is evident that the Anointed One’s terrible ordeal of suffering is but the necessary prelude to infinite glory. He is pictured not only as a great king (52:13; 53:12) but also as humble (53:2), humiliated (52:14), rejected (53:3), and bearing the consequences of mankind’s rebellion (vv 5-6). Yet he is raised up to intercede for, and richly bless, his people (v 12). The Messiah, having accomplished that full obedience that Adam and Israel failed to achieve, will bring Israel and the nations back to God (42:18-19; 49:3, 6).<\/p>\n<p>The writings of Daniel contain important messianic data. Daniel is unique in that he boldly speaks of “Messiah the Prince” (Dn 9:25), identifies him as the “Son of Man” (7:13), and says he suffers (“cut off,” 9:26). This statement of the cutting off (i.e., death) of the Messiah makes possible his work of atonement (9:24). The doctrine of a vicarious substitutionary atonement is the only doctrine of atonement found in the Bible (cf. Lv 17:11). Israel understood that to bear sin meant enduring the consequences, or penalty, for sin (cf. Nm 14:33). The same penal substitution is evident in the working principle of the Messiah’s atoning sacrifice. He is the victim’s substitute to whom is transferred the suffering due the sinner. The penalty having been thus borne vicariously, the suppliant is fully pardoned.<\/p>\n<p>Psalm 22:1 records the plaintive cry of the Messiah bearing man’s penalty for sin (cf. Mt 27:46) as he becomes sin on behalf of his people (2 Cor 5:21). Yet his cry, “My God,” indicates an intimate relationship that cannot be radically severed. Once again the motif of messianic humiliation prior to great exaltation is in view (Ps 22:27). In the so-called “royal psalms” (e.g., 2; 72; 110) it is the priestly intercessor who is also ordained to function as monarch and judge.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah brings the portrait a step further. The one who will enable humans to enter into a salvational covenant with God conveys God’s imputed righteousness: the Messiah, God’s righteous branch, becomes “the Lord our Righteousness.” Paradoxically, under the law no one could be crucified who was not guilty of sin (Dt 21:22). But it is Christ the righteous one who was crucified, thereby forever undermining any supposed legalistic confidence (Dt 21:23; Gal 3:13). More than forgiven, believers are deemed righteous in him (Jer 23:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>While the birthplace of the Messiah was well established (Mi 5:2), his deity was a hotly contested matter. Although few in ancient Israel disputed the belief in a superhuman Messiah, it is doubtful that anyone imagined him to be “God with us” in the fullest sense of the expression (cf. Heb 1:3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MessiahintheNewTestament\">Messiah in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The NT writers present the picture that he who was the child of supernatural origins (Is 7:14; Mi 5:2) carried the full weight of divinity (Is 9:6; Phil 2:6; Col 1:19). He is the Son of God, worthy to receive the worship of all people (Ps 45:6-7; cf. Heb 1:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>The Jews of first-century Palestine knew that the messianic promise would be fulfilled in the coming of one like Moses (Dt 18:18). Parallels between Jesus and Moses are abundant. As mediators, innovators, and propagators of new phases of spiritual life for the people, they are unexcelled. Specifically, both are miraculously spared in infancy (Ex 2; Mt 2:13-23); both renounce a royal court for the sake of serving the people of God (Phil 2:5-8; Heb 11:24-28); both exhibit intense compassion for others (Nm 27:17; Mt 9:36); both commune “face to face” with God (Ex 34:29-30; 2 Cor 3:7); and each mediates a covenant of redemption (Dt 29:1; Heb 8:6-7). But, as Luther observes, “Christ is no Moses.” In the final analysis Moses is but a household servant; the Messiah is the maker and master of all things (Heb 3:3-6; cf. Jn 1:1-2, 18).<\/p>\n<p>Family genealogies are important in Scripture. Rabbis agreed upon the absolute necessity of the Messiah’s Davidic lineage based on Hosea 3:5 and Jeremiah 30:9. The angelic announcement immediately establishes the correct lineage for Jesus (Lk 1:32-33; cf. 2:4), as does Matthew’s (Mt 1:1-17). The Lukan list, like that of Matthew, sets forth the exclusive kingly descent verifying Jesus as Messiah (Lk 3:23-38). Although variations occur between the two genealogies, there is a firm solidarity emphasizing an ancestry within the unique messianic stock. Fully aware of the messianic focus of Scripture (Jn 5:46; 8:56), Jesus acknowledged himself to be the Christ on numerous occasions. He accepted the title from blind Bartimaeus (Mk 10:46-48); from the crowds when he entered Jerusalem (Mt 21:9); from the children at the temple (v 15); and in other contexts as well (Mt 16:16-18; Mk 14:61-62; Lk 4:21; Jn 4:25-26). Nonetheless, he warned his disciples not to broadcast his mighty acts as Messiah prior to his resurrection (Mt 17:9; cf. Lk 9:20-21). Owing to the commonly held (but false) notion that the Messiah’s role was primarily that of a political liberator, Jesus actually avoided use of that term and preferred to identify himself as “the Son of Man.” It was by no means assumed that both designations referred to the same person (cf. Mk 14:61-62). Borrowing essentially from Daniel’s vision of a heavenly conqueror (Dn 7:13-14), Jesus consistently employed this less-known title and filled it with the true character and scope of messianic salvation. Jesus’ teaching in this regard enabled his disciples to correct their erroneous views concerning his mission (Mt 16:21-23). In the fullness of time they would come to see him not only as Messiah but also as the theme of the entire OT (Mt 5:17; Lk 24:27, 44; Jn 5:39; cf. Heb 10:7). When Jesus expounded the Scriptures beginning with the Torah (Lk 24:27), he did so as the living exegesis of God, the Word made flesh (Jn 1:14, 18). Legitimate messianic exposition is found in a host of texts, such as Psalms 2; 16; 22; 40; 110; Isaiah 7:14; 9:6; 11:1; 40:10-11; 50:6; 52:13–53:12; 61:1; 63:1-6; Jeremiah 23:5-6; 33:14-16; Ezekiel 34:23; 37:25; Daniel 9:24-27; Hosea 11:1; Micah 5:2; Zechariah 9:9; 11:13; 12:10; 13:7; Malachi 3:1; 4:2.<\/p>\n<p>The messiahship of Jesus is firmly proclaimed by all four evangelists (Mt 1:1; Mk 1:1; Lk 24:26; Jn 20:31). Peter on Pentecost, Philip before the Ethiopian eunuch, and Apollos in open debate all argue convincingly that Jesus is the Messiah (Acts 2:36; 8:35; 28:28). Peter says he was “made” both Lord and Christ (2:36), signifying that the resurrection rightfully confirms him as such. Similarly, the apostle Paul speaks of Jesus’ resurrection as a patent declaration of his inalienable right to the title (Rom 1:4). For the ex-Pharisee and former persecutor of the church, “Jesus the Christ” is the very heart and soul of Paul’s preaching. Nothing is worthy to be compared to the glory of the Messiah; everything pales by comparison (Phil 3:5-10). The apostle’s all-consuming passion is for others to know the fullness of God in the person of his only Son (Eph 3:14-19).<\/p>\n<p>The Holy Spirit in Scripture speaks of Jesus with wide-ranging appellatives—Holy One, Judge, Righteous One, King, Son of God, and Lord—but these are not exhaustive. In him all the lines of messianic prediction converge; he is the touchstone whereby their validity is firmly established. The Lord Jesus Christ is himself the heart and substance of that covenant through which sinful people may be reconciled to a holy God (Is 42:6; Jn 14:6). That Jesus is the Messiah of Israel, God incarnate, exhaustively fulfills prophecy, type, and symbol—all shadows of his coming. Therefore, all should trust in him, the source of all grace, the only abiding treasure (Mt 12:21; Jn 1:16-17; Col 2:3). Anointed as prophet, he leads us into all truth (Jn 6:14; 7:16); as priest he intercedes for us (Heb 7:21); and as king he reigns over us (Phil 2:9-10).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Branch; Christology; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Redeemer, Redemption; Son of God; Son of Man.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MESSIAH<\/h3>\n<p>Title derived from the Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiach<\/span><em>,<\/em> a verbal adjective meaning “anointed one.” Along with its NT equivalent, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> (Christ), it refers to an act of consecration whereby an individual is set apart to serve God and then anointed with oil. The verbal root <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashach<\/span><em>)<\/em> conveys this idea as well.<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s practice of ceremonially anointing with oil is present in several contexts. Priests were regularly anointed prior to their divinely given service at the altar of sacrifice (Lv 4:3). While there is evidence for a literal anointing of prophets (1 Kgs 19:16), this does not appear to have been a standard practice. The anointing of Saul and David by Samuel established the act as a significant prerequisite for Hebrew kings before they assumed their positions of royal leadership. The king was especially considered to be the Lord’s anointed and as such was viewed to hold a secure position before men (1 Sm 12:14; 2 Sm 19:21) and God (Pss 2:2; 20:6). Along with numerous messianic prophecies, these proceedings helped inform the Jews of the Anointed One, par excellence, who would eventually come to bring salvation to Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Concluding the 13 articles of Hebraic faith attributed to Moses Maimonides (13th century <span>AD<\/span>) is the statement still found in many Hebrew prayer books: “I believe with a perfect heart that the Messiah will come; and although his coming be delayed, I will still wait patiently for his speedy appearance.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MessiahintheOldTestament\">Messiah in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Jewish hope for the advent of the Messiah developed dynamically from the period of David’s reign, when it was prophesied that his kingdom would endure to the end of time (2 Sm 7:16). Israel was told that, through David’s descendants, his throne would exert a never-ending dominion over all the earth (2 Sm 22:48-51; Jer 33). It is with this aspect of messianic salvation that Jewish minds have traditionally been preoccupied (cf. Acts 1:6).<\/p>\n<p>Among Orthodox rabbis there has never been a lack of conjecture respecting the details of the Messiah’s ministry. At one time the rabbis applied no less than 456 passages of Scripture to his person and salvation. Preoccupation with the Messiah is evident in the tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> (Babylonian Talmud), where passages state that the world was created for him and that all the prophets prophesied of his days (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 98b, 99a). By and large, Orthodoxy still retains its time-worn belief in the Messiah’s reign in Jerusalem, the rebuilding of the temple, and the reestablishment of both priesthood and sacrifice.<\/p>\n<p>While later Judaism looked for the Messiah as an eschatological figure who will reign at the end of time, modern Jewish thought has largely jettisoned the traditional notion of a personal Messiah in favor of belief in a messianic age. Prevalent liberal Judaism envisions the world ultimately perfected through the influence of the twin Judaic ideals of justice and compassion. Such conviction, ignoring the plight of fallen humans and the teaching of Scripture, substitutes humanistic thinking for miraculous heavenly intervention.<\/p>\n<p>While the Messiah’s origin is linked firmly to the house of David (2 Sm 7:14; Hos 3:5), the promise for a Messiah was given long before David lived. In fact, the hope for the Messiah is implicit in the first promise of the establishment of the kingdom of God. Addressed to Satan, Genesis 3:15 declares that God will place hostility between the serpent and the woman until, in the fullness of time, the “seed” of the woman inflicts a fatal blow to the head of the serpent.<\/p>\n<p>The nature of messianic prophecy is progressive; each prophecy casts more light on the subject. This occurs, for example, respecting the concept of the “seed”: Messiah is to be born of a woman (Gn 3:15), through the line of Shem (9:26) and specifically through Abraham (22:18). Yet even as late as Genesis 22:18, the “seed” is not clearly presented as a person, since <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">zerah<\/span> (seed) may indicate a singular or plural object. Still less apparent in these early stages of messianic prophecy is the nature of the “bruising” that is to occur. Yet the idea of the Messiah being crushed for sin is implicit in the Genesis pronouncement, as is the violence associated with that act. Chief among the messianic prophets, Isaiah gives full range to the axiom that the Anointed One must endure extensive suffering (Is 53:1). Under the figure “the Servant of the Lord,” four “servant songs” delineate the mission of the future deliverer (Is 42:1-7; 49:1-9; 50:4-11; 52:13–53:12). While it is true that Isaiah does not explicitly link the title Messiah with the Servant of the Lord, identifying both figures as one and the same person is justifiable. Both figures are uniquely anointed (61:1); each brings light to the Gentiles (55:4; cf. 49:6); neither is pretentious in his first appearance (7:14-15; 11:1; cf. 42:3; 53:1); and the title of Davidic “branch” rests upon them both (11:1-4). Equally significant are the dual facts of their humiliation and exaltation (49:7; 52:13-15). Jewish scholars of the early Christian era in the Aramaic Targum on the prophets paraphrase Isaiah 42:1, “Behold my Servant Messiah” and begin Isaiah 53, “Behold my Servant Messiah will prosper.” While Cyrus may be spoken of as “anointed,” no final salvific work is attributed to him (45:1-5). Israel, although elect and loved by God (41:8), is ill-equipped as God’s servant to bring his redeeming work to mankind (42:18). The collapse of David’s dynasty points eloquently to Israel’s need for an anointed monarch who will heal the apostasy and disobedience (Ex 33:5; Hos 4:1). More and more, OT history presents Israel’s comprehensive moral failure. Her problem, which she shares with mankind, can only be solved by the making of a covenant whose surety and focal point is both a personal Savior and sovereign Lord (Jer 31:31-34). The advent of such a champion lives in the recorded promise of a shoot from the stump of Jesse’s fallen tree, who will bring the light of life to God’s benighted people (Is 9:2; 11:1).<\/p>\n<p>It is difficult to get away from the idea that the concept of servanthood and lowliness belongs within the sphere of royalty (Zec 9:9). The concept of the Messiah filling the complementary offices of priest and king is incontrovertible (Ps 110:1-4); a suffering priest-king is far less obvious. Some among the Talmudic writers apparently recognized the likelihood that the Messiah would have to suffer. In the Babylonian Talmud, tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 98b, the Messiah is said to bear sicknesses and pain. Among the prayers for the Day of Atonement may be found the words of Eleazar ben Qalir (perhaps as late as <span>AD<\/span> 1000): “Our righteous Messiah has departed from us; we are horror-stricken, and there is none to justify us. Our iniquities and the yoke of our transgressions he carries, and is wounded for our transgressions. He bears on his shoulders our sins to find pardon for our iniquities. May we be healed by his stripes.” In a similar vein Rabbi Eliyya de Vidas writes, “The meaning of ‘He was wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities,’ is that since the Messiah bears our iniquities, which produce the effect of His being bruised, it follows that whosoever will not admit that the Messiah thus suffers for our iniquities must endure and suffer for them himself.” For all this, it is highly doubtful that anyone imagined the Messiah would accomplish his salvational work by means of his own death (cf. Is 53:12). When rabbinic speculation failed to satisfactorily harmonize the paradoxical facts of humiliation and exaltation, some hypothesized that God would send a Messiah to suffer as well as a Messiah to reign. Biblically, it is evident that the Anointed One’s terrible ordeal of suffering is but the necessary prelude to infinite glory. He is pictured not only as a great king (52:13; 53:12) but also as humble (53:2), humiliated (52:14), rejected (53:3), and bearing the consequences of mankind’s rebellion (vv 5-6). Yet he is raised up to intercede for, and richly bless, his people (v 12). The Messiah, having accomplished that full obedience that Adam and Israel failed to achieve, will bring Israel and the nations back to God (42:18-19; 49:3, 6).<\/p>\n<p>The writings of Daniel contain important messianic data. Daniel is unique in that he boldly speaks of “Messiah the Prince” (Dn 9:25), identifies him as the “Son of Man” (7:13), and says he suffers (“cut off,” 9:26). This statement of the cutting off (i.e., death) of the Messiah makes possible his work of atonement (9:24). The doctrine of a vicarious substitutionary atonement is the only doctrine of atonement found in the Bible (cf. Lv 17:11). Israel understood that to bear sin meant enduring the consequences, or penalty, for sin (cf. Nm 14:33). The same penal substitution is evident in the working principle of the Messiah’s atoning sacrifice. He is the victim’s substitute to whom is transferred the suffering due the sinner. The penalty having been thus borne vicariously, the suppliant is fully pardoned.<\/p>\n<p>Psalm 22:1 records the plaintive cry of the Messiah bearing man’s penalty for sin (cf. Mt 27:46) as he becomes sin on behalf of his people (2 Cor 5:21). Yet his cry, “My God,” indicates an intimate relationship that cannot be radically severed. Once again the motif of messianic humiliation prior to great exaltation is in view (Ps 22:27). In the so-called “royal psalms” (e.g., 2; 72; 110) it is the priestly intercessor who is also ordained to function as monarch and judge.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah brings the portrait a step further. The one who will enable humans to enter into a salvational covenant with God conveys God’s imputed righteousness: the Messiah, God’s righteous branch, becomes “the Lord our Righteousness.” Paradoxically, under the law no one could be crucified who was not guilty of sin (Dt 21:22). But it is Christ the righteous one who was crucified, thereby forever undermining any supposed legalistic confidence (Dt 21:23; Gal 3:13). More than forgiven, believers are deemed righteous in him (Jer 23:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>While the birthplace of the Messiah was well established (Mi 5:2), his deity was a hotly contested matter. Although few in ancient Israel disputed the belief in a superhuman Messiah, it is doubtful that anyone imagined him to be “God with us” in the fullest sense of the expression (cf. Heb 1:3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MessiahintheNewTestament\">Messiah in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The NT writers present the picture that he who was the child of supernatural origins (Is 7:14; Mi 5:2) carried the full weight of divinity (Is 9:6; Phil 2:6; Col 1:19). He is the Son of God, worthy to receive the worship of all people (Ps 45:6-7; cf. Heb 1:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>The Jews of first-century Palestine knew that the messianic promise would be fulfilled in the coming of one like Moses (Dt 18:18). Parallels between Jesus and Moses are abundant. As mediators, innovators, and propagators of new phases of spiritual life for the people, they are unexcelled. Specifically, both are miraculously spared in infancy (Ex 2; Mt 2:13-23); both renounce a royal court for the sake of serving the people of God (Phil 2:5-8; Heb 11:24-28); both exhibit intense compassion for others (Nm 27:17; Mt 9:36); both commune “face to face” with God (Ex 34:29-30; 2 Cor 3:7); and each mediates a covenant of redemption (Dt 29:1; Heb 8:6-7). But, as Luther observes, “Christ is no Moses.” In the final analysis Moses is but a household servant; the Messiah is the maker and master of all things (Heb 3:3-6; cf. Jn 1:1-2, 18).<\/p>\n<p>Family genealogies are important in Scripture. Rabbis agreed upon the absolute necessity of the Messiah’s Davidic lineage based on Hosea 3:5 and Jeremiah 30:9. The angelic announcement immediately establishes the correct lineage for Jesus (Lk 1:32-33; cf. 2:4), as does Matthew’s (Mt 1:1-17). The Lukan list, like that of Matthew, sets forth the exclusive kingly descent verifying Jesus as Messiah (Lk 3:23-38). Although variations occur between the two genealogies, there is a firm solidarity emphasizing an ancestry within the unique messianic stock. Fully aware of the messianic focus of Scripture (Jn 5:46; 8:56), Jesus acknowledged himself to be the Christ on numerous occasions. He accepted the title from blind Bartimaeus (Mk 10:46-48); from the crowds when he entered Jerusalem (Mt 21:9); from the children at the temple (v 15); and in other contexts as well (Mt 16:16-18; Mk 14:61-62; Lk 4:21; Jn 4:25-26). Nonetheless, he warned his disciples not to broadcast his mighty acts as Messiah prior to his resurrection (Mt 17:9; cf. Lk 9:20-21). Owing to the commonly held (but false) notion that the Messiah’s role was primarily that of a political liberator, Jesus actually avoided use of that term and preferred to identify himself as “the Son of Man.” It was by no means assumed that both designations referred to the same person (cf. Mk 14:61-62). Borrowing essentially from Daniel’s vision of a heavenly conqueror (Dn 7:13-14), Jesus consistently employed this less-known title and filled it with the true character and scope of messianic salvation. Jesus’ teaching in this regard enabled his disciples to correct their erroneous views concerning his mission (Mt 16:21-23). In the fullness of time they would come to see him not only as Messiah but also as the theme of the entire OT (Mt 5:17; Lk 24:27, 44; Jn 5:39; cf. Heb 10:7). When Jesus expounded the Scriptures beginning with the Torah (Lk 24:27), he did so as the living exegesis of God, the Word made flesh (Jn 1:14, 18). Legitimate messianic exposition is found in a host of texts, such as Psalms 2; 16; 22; 40; 110; Isaiah 7:14; 9:6; 11:1; 40:10-11; 50:6; 52:13–53:12; 61:1; 63:1-6; Jeremiah 23:5-6; 33:14-16; Ezekiel 34:23; 37:25; Daniel 9:24-27; Hosea 11:1; Micah 5:2; Zechariah 9:9; 11:13; 12:10; 13:7; Malachi 3:1; 4:2.<\/p>\n<p>The messiahship of Jesus is firmly proclaimed by all four evangelists (Mt 1:1; Mk 1:1; Lk 24:26; Jn 20:31). Peter on Pentecost, Philip before the Ethiopian eunuch, and Apollos in open debate all argue convincingly that Jesus is the Messiah (Acts 2:36; 8:35; 28:28). Peter says he was “made” both Lord and Christ (2:36), signifying that the resurrection rightfully confirms him as such. Similarly, the apostle Paul speaks of Jesus’ resurrection as a patent declaration of his inalienable right to the title (Rom 1:4). For the ex-Pharisee and former persecutor of the church, “Jesus the Christ” is the very heart and soul of Paul’s preaching. Nothing is worthy to be compared to the glory of the Messiah; everything pales by comparison (Phil 3:5-10). The apostle’s all-consuming passion is for others to know the fullness of God in the person of his only Son (Eph 3:14-19).<\/p>\n<p>The Holy Spirit in Scripture speaks of Jesus with wide-ranging appellatives—Holy One, Judge, Righteous One, King, Son of God, and Lord—but these are not exhaustive. In him all the lines of messianic prediction converge; he is the touchstone whereby their validity is firmly established. The Lord Jesus Christ is himself the heart and substance of that covenant through which sinful people may be reconciled to a holy God (Is 42:6; Jn 14:6). That Jesus is the Messiah of Israel, God incarnate, exhaustively fulfills prophecy, type, and symbol—all shadows of his coming. Therefore, all should trust in him, the source of all grace, the only abiding treasure (Mt 12:21; Jn 1:16-17; Col 2:3). Anointed as prophet, he leads us into all truth (Jn 6:14; 7:16); as priest he intercedes for us (Heb 7:21); and as king he reigns over us (Phil 2:9-10).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Branch; Christology; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Redeemer, Redemption; Son of God; Son of Man.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MESSIAH Title derived from the Hebrew, mashiach, a verbal adjective meaning “anointed one.” Along with its NT equivalent, christos (Christ), it refers to an act of consecration whereby an individual is set apart to serve God and then anointed with oil. The verbal root (mashach) conveys this idea as well. Israel’s practice of ceremonially anointing with oil is present in several contexts. Priests were regularly anointed prior to their divinely given service at the altar of sacrifice (Lv 4:3). ...","summary_en":"MESSIAH Title derived from the Hebrew, mashiach, a verbal adjective meaning “anointed one.” Along with its NT equivalent, christos (Christ), it refers to an act of consecration whereby an individual is set apart to serve God and then anointed with oil. The verbal root (mashach) conveys this idea as well. Israel’s practice of ceremonially anointing with oil is present in several contexts. Priests were regularly anointed prior to their divinely given service at the altar of sacrifice (Lv 4:3). ...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":30311,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Philo*, Judaeus","title_en":"Philo*, Judaeus","content_ro":"<h3>PHILO*, J<span>udaeus<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Hellenistic Jewish philosopher (c. 25 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 40) whose thought presents the first major confrontation of biblical faith with Greek thought.<\/p>\n<p>Son of a prominent Alexandrian family, Philo was educated both in the Jewish faith and in Greek philosophy and culture. Of the events of his life we know little, except that in <span>AD<\/span> 40 he headed a delegation from the Jewish community in Alexandria to the emperor Caligula in Rome. Ethnic tension in Alexandria had grown as the Jewish populace increased and prospered. The tension erupted in <span>AD<\/span> 42 into riots by the Greeks and the expulsion of Jews from the Gentile sections into which they had spread. Jewish commercial success, particularly in the wheat trade, led to intensified anti-Semitism. Out of the riots came two apologetic treatises by Philo Judaeus, <em>Against Flaccus<\/em> (Flaccus was governing in Alexandria) and <em>Embassy to Caligula<\/em> (Caligula was emperor in Rome).<\/p>\n<p>The Jewish community in Alexandria was thoroughly Hellenized. Even the Scriptures were read in the Greek translation called the Septuagint. In spite of the fact that these Jews were living and participating in Greek culture, they remained orthodox. Philo was no exception. On the one hand, he carefully observed the Mosaic law and held that it is the infallibly revealed will of God, both for God’s chosen people—the Jews—and for the Gentiles. On the other hand, Philo was very Greek. He probably knew Hebrew only imperfectly and received a liberal education under Greek tutors. His Bible was the OT, especially the Pentateuch, which he held to be most authoritative, but he read it in Greek translation. Because he held that the Septuagint was divinely inspired, Philo had no need to refer to the original Hebrew text.<\/p>\n<p>To understand Philo’s work, one must recognize that the need to come to terms with Greek culture stemmed not merely from practical necessity but also from the fact that Judaism is a missionary religion. Jews could not simply turn their backs on the Greek world, for the prophets had called Israel to be a light to the Gentiles. From his studies Philo was also convinced that there is much that is true in Greek philosophy. Consequently, he was anxious to find some way of correlating and harmonizing biblically revealed truth with the teachings of the philosophers. As a Jewish believer considering the claims of Greek philosophy, Philo was confronted with problems very similar to those posed for a Christian by scientific theories of evolution in our day.<\/p>\n<p>The method that Philo used to harmonize Scripture with the teachings of the philosophers was allegorical interpretation. This method of interpretation had been practiced by many before Philo, and many others followed his example. Through the use of this method, Genesis could be read as a contemporary myth about the human condition and man’s search for salvation, rather than as an ancient and somewhat crude legend (as the Greeks would see it). The proper reading of the text gives not ancient history and geography but philosophical and moral truth. According to Philo, Moses—both because he was divinely instructed and because he had attained the summit of philosophy—did not resort to mythical fictions, as poets and sophists do; he was able to make ideas visible. By using allegorical interpretation, Philo found in the historical narrative and ceremonial law an inward, spiritual meaning that incorporates the truth he found in Greek thought.<\/p>\n<p>In dealing with the conception of God, Philo approached Greek views critically and rejected what was opposed to Scripture. However, in dealing with the structure and composition of the world, Scripture is quite vague, and so Philo felt free to adopt whatever seemed most reasonable in the writings of the philosophers. He believed that God is the source of both the Mosaic law and the truths of Greek philosophy. The human mind is made in the image of the divine Logos, and so it has some capacity to receive and discover truths about realities beyond the sensible.<\/p>\n<p>Among the philosophers, Philo found Plato’s view closest to the truth. God existed from eternity without a world, and after he made the world, he continued to exist above and beyond it. God is the active cause, and this world is passive, incapable of life and motion by itself, but a most perfect masterpiece when set in motion, shaped, and quickened by God. Moreover, God does not neglect his creation but cares for it and preserves it. This care is called providence. While the Greeks had spoken of a universal providence that preserves natural processes, for Philo providence acquired a new meaning. It is God’s care for individual beings, so that it includes the power to suspend the laws of nature.<\/p>\n<p>God is one but is the source of all multiplicity. He is immutable and self-sufficient and hence does not need the world. Creation has its source in his goodness. Although Moses said that the world was created in six days, God must be thought of as doing all things simultaneously. The account of six days serves to show that there is order in things. The visible world was created out of nonbeing, from nothing. All the available matter was used in creation, so the world is unique. The world was created by God’s will, and it may be imperishable. Philo thought that Plato followed Moses in thinking that the world was created by God.<\/p>\n<p>Concerning the doctrine of the Logos, Philo is both dependent upon and yet critical of the Greek philosophers. Plato had affirmed that there are eternal ideas to which the Craftsman or Maker looked when forming the world. Philo could not accept this position, because God alone is eternal. He harmonized the two views by affirming that from eternity the ideas existed as thoughts of God, but they became a fully formed intelligible world only when God willed to create the visible world. The universe of the ideas, which has no location other than the divine reason, is the pattern according to which the sensible world was made.<\/p>\n<p>To Philo, the Logos is much more than just the instrument by which the visible world was made. It is also described as “the idea of ideas,” the first-begotten Son of the uncreated Father and “second God,” the archetype of human reason. The Logos is the vital power that holds together the entire hierarchy of created beings. As God’s viceroy, he mediates revelation to the created order. He stands on the frontier between Creator and creature. He is the high priest who intercedes with God on behalf of mortals. He appeared in the burning bush and dwelt in Moses. Some think that the Logos is God, but he is really God’s image. While one can be quite certain that the Logos was not a person for Philo, the exact status of this power in relation to God is by no means clear.<\/p>\n<p>Various aspects of this teaching have been taken up by Christian writers, most notably John, who taught that the Logos (the Word) is the instrument by means of which God created the world (see Jn 1:1-4). About the origins of this view much less is known. It appears that the notion of the Logos was current in Hellenistic Judaism. Its function in Philo’s thought seems to indicate that it was philosophical considerations, rather than biblical ones, that were most significant in his teaching.<\/p>\n<p>Philo had other views about the creation. He believed that while the heavenly bodies are living creatures endowed with mind and not susceptible to evil, man is of a mixed nature, liable to failure. He can be both wise and foolish, just and unjust. God made all good things by himself, but man, because he is liable to both good and evil, must have been made by lesser deities. This is why we are told by Moses that God said, “Let <em>us<\/em> make man” (Gn 1:26, emphasis added). In the case of man, then, being created involved a Fall. Here also there are two steps in Creation. First, there is man created after the divine image, and this is an idea or type, an object of thought only, incorporeal, neither male nor female, and by nature incorruptible (Gn 1:26). Later it says that “God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life” (Gn 2:7). This man became an object of sense perception, consisting of body and soul, man or woman, by nature mortal. Woman became for man the beginning of blameworthy life. When man and woman saw each other, desire was aroused, and this desire produced bodily pleasure. This pleasure is the beginning of wrongs and violation of law. The Garden of Eden is also meant to be taken symbolically rather than literally. There never have been trees of life or of understanding, nor is it likely that any will ever appear on earth. The tree of life signifies reverence toward God; the tree of knowledge of good and evil signifies moral prudence.<\/p>\n<p>One sees in Philo, then, a tendency to dualism in which spirit is good and matter evil, a tendency derived from Platonism and read into the OT. This led Philo to agree with the Stoics that the only good is the good of the soul. God gives us the world to use, not to possess. To rise to the eternal world of the mind, a man must suppress all responses to the sensible world. In general, Philo tended toward a world-denying asceticism.<\/p>\n<p>The only temple worthy of God is a pure soul. True religion consists in inner devotion rather than externals. In this life the soul is a pilgrim, like Abraham or like the Israelites wandering in the desert. Through spiritual self-discipline, the soul comes to realize that the body is a major obstacle to perfection. The goal of this spirituality is to draw near to God, who has drawn the mind to himself. God is knowable by the mind, but he is unknowable in himself. We can know only that he is, not what he is. For Philo, the soul in its search for perfection ultimately comes to discover that it must cease to rely on itself and must acknowledge that virtue is a gift of God. The man who has discovered his own limitations comes to know God and his own dependence upon God.<\/p>\n<p>Although Josephus borrowed some from Philo, Philo’s greatest influence was on Christian writers. Hellenistic Judaism became less significant as the Judaism of the rabbis became the norm during the next two centuries. By contrast, second- and third-century Christians had much in common with Philo. Parts of his work were translated into Latin and Armenian. Clement and Origen, among the Greek fathers, and Ambrose, among the Latin fathers, were especially indebted to him.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PHILO*, J<span>udaeus<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Hellenistic Jewish philosopher (c. 25 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 40) whose thought presents the first major confrontation of biblical faith with Greek thought.<\/p>\n<p>Son of a prominent Alexandrian family, Philo was educated both in the Jewish faith and in Greek philosophy and culture. Of the events of his life we know little, except that in <span>AD<\/span> 40 he headed a delegation from the Jewish community in Alexandria to the emperor Caligula in Rome. Ethnic tension in Alexandria had grown as the Jewish populace increased and prospered. The tension erupted in <span>AD<\/span> 42 into riots by the Greeks and the expulsion of Jews from the Gentile sections into which they had spread. Jewish commercial success, particularly in the wheat trade, led to intensified anti-Semitism. Out of the riots came two apologetic treatises by Philo Judaeus, <em>Against Flaccus<\/em> (Flaccus was governing in Alexandria) and <em>Embassy to Caligula<\/em> (Caligula was emperor in Rome).<\/p>\n<p>The Jewish community in Alexandria was thoroughly Hellenized. Even the Scriptures were read in the Greek translation called the Septuagint. In spite of the fact that these Jews were living and participating in Greek culture, they remained orthodox. Philo was no exception. On the one hand, he carefully observed the Mosaic law and held that it is the infallibly revealed will of God, both for God’s chosen people—the Jews—and for the Gentiles. On the other hand, Philo was very Greek. He probably knew Hebrew only imperfectly and received a liberal education under Greek tutors. His Bible was the OT, especially the Pentateuch, which he held to be most authoritative, but he read it in Greek translation. Because he held that the Septuagint was divinely inspired, Philo had no need to refer to the original Hebrew text.<\/p>\n<p>To understand Philo’s work, one must recognize that the need to come to terms with Greek culture stemmed not merely from practical necessity but also from the fact that Judaism is a missionary religion. Jews could not simply turn their backs on the Greek world, for the prophets had called Israel to be a light to the Gentiles. From his studies Philo was also convinced that there is much that is true in Greek philosophy. Consequently, he was anxious to find some way of correlating and harmonizing biblically revealed truth with the teachings of the philosophers. As a Jewish believer considering the claims of Greek philosophy, Philo was confronted with problems very similar to those posed for a Christian by scientific theories of evolution in our day.<\/p>\n<p>The method that Philo used to harmonize Scripture with the teachings of the philosophers was allegorical interpretation. This method of interpretation had been practiced by many before Philo, and many others followed his example. Through the use of this method, Genesis could be read as a contemporary myth about the human condition and man’s search for salvation, rather than as an ancient and somewhat crude legend (as the Greeks would see it). The proper reading of the text gives not ancient history and geography but philosophical and moral truth. According to Philo, Moses—both because he was divinely instructed and because he had attained the summit of philosophy—did not resort to mythical fictions, as poets and sophists do; he was able to make ideas visible. By using allegorical interpretation, Philo found in the historical narrative and ceremonial law an inward, spiritual meaning that incorporates the truth he found in Greek thought.<\/p>\n<p>In dealing with the conception of God, Philo approached Greek views critically and rejected what was opposed to Scripture. However, in dealing with the structure and composition of the world, Scripture is quite vague, and so Philo felt free to adopt whatever seemed most reasonable in the writings of the philosophers. He believed that God is the source of both the Mosaic law and the truths of Greek philosophy. The human mind is made in the image of the divine Logos, and so it has some capacity to receive and discover truths about realities beyond the sensible.<\/p>\n<p>Among the philosophers, Philo found Plato’s view closest to the truth. God existed from eternity without a world, and after he made the world, he continued to exist above and beyond it. God is the active cause, and this world is passive, incapable of life and motion by itself, but a most perfect masterpiece when set in motion, shaped, and quickened by God. Moreover, God does not neglect his creation but cares for it and preserves it. This care is called providence. While the Greeks had spoken of a universal providence that preserves natural processes, for Philo providence acquired a new meaning. It is God’s care for individual beings, so that it includes the power to suspend the laws of nature.<\/p>\n<p>God is one but is the source of all multiplicity. He is immutable and self-sufficient and hence does not need the world. Creation has its source in his goodness. Although Moses said that the world was created in six days, God must be thought of as doing all things simultaneously. The account of six days serves to show that there is order in things. The visible world was created out of nonbeing, from nothing. All the available matter was used in creation, so the world is unique. The world was created by God’s will, and it may be imperishable. Philo thought that Plato followed Moses in thinking that the world was created by God.<\/p>\n<p>Concerning the doctrine of the Logos, Philo is both dependent upon and yet critical of the Greek philosophers. Plato had affirmed that there are eternal ideas to which the Craftsman or Maker looked when forming the world. Philo could not accept this position, because God alone is eternal. He harmonized the two views by affirming that from eternity the ideas existed as thoughts of God, but they became a fully formed intelligible world only when God willed to create the visible world. The universe of the ideas, which has no location other than the divine reason, is the pattern according to which the sensible world was made.<\/p>\n<p>To Philo, the Logos is much more than just the instrument by which the visible world was made. It is also described as “the idea of ideas,” the first-begotten Son of the uncreated Father and “second God,” the archetype of human reason. The Logos is the vital power that holds together the entire hierarchy of created beings. As God’s viceroy, he mediates revelation to the created order. He stands on the frontier between Creator and creature. He is the high priest who intercedes with God on behalf of mortals. He appeared in the burning bush and dwelt in Moses. Some think that the Logos is God, but he is really God’s image. While one can be quite certain that the Logos was not a person for Philo, the exact status of this power in relation to God is by no means clear.<\/p>\n<p>Various aspects of this teaching have been taken up by Christian writers, most notably John, who taught that the Logos (the Word) is the instrument by means of which God created the world (see Jn 1:1-4). About the origins of this view much less is known. It appears that the notion of the Logos was current in Hellenistic Judaism. Its function in Philo’s thought seems to indicate that it was philosophical considerations, rather than biblical ones, that were most significant in his teaching.<\/p>\n<p>Philo had other views about the creation. He believed that while the heavenly bodies are living creatures endowed with mind and not susceptible to evil, man is of a mixed nature, liable to failure. He can be both wise and foolish, just and unjust. God made all good things by himself, but man, because he is liable to both good and evil, must have been made by lesser deities. This is why we are told by Moses that God said, “Let <em>us<\/em> make man” (Gn 1:26, emphasis added). In the case of man, then, being created involved a Fall. Here also there are two steps in Creation. First, there is man created after the divine image, and this is an idea or type, an object of thought only, incorporeal, neither male nor female, and by nature incorruptible (Gn 1:26). Later it says that “God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life” (Gn 2:7). This man became an object of sense perception, consisting of body and soul, man or woman, by nature mortal. Woman became for man the beginning of blameworthy life. When man and woman saw each other, desire was aroused, and this desire produced bodily pleasure. This pleasure is the beginning of wrongs and violation of law. The Garden of Eden is also meant to be taken symbolically rather than literally. There never have been trees of life or of understanding, nor is it likely that any will ever appear on earth. The tree of life signifies reverence toward God; the tree of knowledge of good and evil signifies moral prudence.<\/p>\n<p>One sees in Philo, then, a tendency to dualism in which spirit is good and matter evil, a tendency derived from Platonism and read into the OT. This led Philo to agree with the Stoics that the only good is the good of the soul. God gives us the world to use, not to possess. To rise to the eternal world of the mind, a man must suppress all responses to the sensible world. In general, Philo tended toward a world-denying asceticism.<\/p>\n<p>The only temple worthy of God is a pure soul. True religion consists in inner devotion rather than externals. In this life the soul is a pilgrim, like Abraham or like the Israelites wandering in the desert. Through spiritual self-discipline, the soul comes to realize that the body is a major obstacle to perfection. The goal of this spirituality is to draw near to God, who has drawn the mind to himself. God is knowable by the mind, but he is unknowable in himself. We can know only that he is, not what he is. For Philo, the soul in its search for perfection ultimately comes to discover that it must cease to rely on itself and must acknowledge that virtue is a gift of God. The man who has discovered his own limitations comes to know God and his own dependence upon God.<\/p>\n<p>Although Josephus borrowed some from Philo, Philo’s greatest influence was on Christian writers. Hellenistic Judaism became less significant as the Judaism of the rabbis became the norm during the next two centuries. By contrast, second- and third-century Christians had much in common with Philo. Parts of his work were translated into Latin and Armenian. Clement and Origen, among the Greek fathers, and Ambrose, among the Latin fathers, were especially indebted to him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PHILO*, Judaeus Hellenistic Jewish philosopher (c. 25 BC–AD 40) whose thought presents the first major confrontation of biblical faith with Greek thought. Son of a prominent Alexandrian family, Philo was educated both in the Jewish faith and in Greek philosophy and culture. Of the events of his life we know little, except that in AD 40 he headed a delegation from the Jewish community in Alexandria to the emperor Caligula in Rome. Ethnic tension in Alexandria had grown as the Jewish populace i...","summary_en":"PHILO*, Judaeus Hellenistic Jewish philosopher (c. 25 BC–AD 40) whose thought presents the first major confrontation of biblical faith with Greek thought. Son of a prominent Alexandrian family, Philo was educated both in the Jewish faith and in Greek philosophy and culture. Of the events of his life we know little, except that in AD 40 he headed a delegation from the Jewish community in Alexandria to the emperor Caligula in Rome. Ethnic tension in Alexandria had grown as the Jewish populace i...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":30840,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Biblical Poetry","title_en":"Biblical Poetry","content_ro":"<h3>POETRY, B<span>iblical<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Poetic language in Scripture.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT contains all that we know of the poetry of Israel, and what we have occupies an important place in that literature. It was presumably well known throughout the ancient Near East, for its fame had spread even to Babylon (Ps 137:3). Much of the OT is poetic in spirit and structure—a feature of the prophetic writings as well as the poetic literature. In the former are found passages of elevated poetry, studded with brilliant gems of imagery. The movement is rhythmical, with meter, parallelism, and strophic arrangement, as in the poetry books.<\/p>\n<p>The English Revised Version of the Bible (1881) first rendered a great service to English readers by printing OT poetry in parallel lines. Where this is not done in the prophetic literature, the poetic quality of these books is obscured. Note that besides the OT books recognized as poetry—the Psalms, Job, Lamentations, Song of Songs, and Proverbs—Ecclesiastes and the Prophets consist of prose and poetry. The historical books also contain fine examples of poetry.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew language was an ideal instrument for expressing poetic speech. Its simplicity of form combined intensity of feeling and pictorial power and allowed great play of imagination. Figures, metaphors, and hyperboles are extremely common. In its powerful imagery the genius of Hebrew poetry comes to its finest expression.<\/p>\n<p>The normal unit of Hebrew verse is the couplet of two parallel lines. But this is not the only grouping of lines in Hebrew poetry. Units of three (Pss 1:1; 5:11; 45:1-2), four (Pss 1:3; 55:21; Prv 27:15-16), five (Ps 6:6-7; Prv 24:23-25), six (Ps 99:1-3; Prv 30:21-23), and even larger combinations of parallel lines occur.<\/p>\n<p>As far as can be determined, meter is absent from biblical poetry. Certainly there is little concern for the careful meter that marks classic Greek and Latin, as well as much of English, poetry. The only exception is found in wailing songs or laments (Jer 9:18-20; Lam 1–4). This is called the lamentation meter, where the verse is in two parts. Rhyme also is so rare as to be almost nonexistent.<\/p>\n<p>On the other hand, Hebrew poetry is rhythmical—one of its distinguishing features. Its rhythm recurs with stressed and unstressed syllables in relatively regular succession. There are usually three or four accents or beats to a line, but the rhythmic unit is not uniform. Rhythm in Hebrew poetry, however, is not confined to the balance of accents or beats in a line. The meaning of the words and their position in the line are also significant—a feature called parallelism. This distinguishing characteristic was first clearly recognized by Dr. Robert Lowth, who in 1753 developed the principle of parallelism.<\/p>\n<p>He distinguished three types. The first is <em>synonymous parallelism,<\/em> where the thought expressed in the first part of the verse is repeated in the second part, in different but equivalent terms (Pss 2:4; 19:1; 36:1-2; 103:11-12; Prv 3:13-18). The second is <em>antithetic parallelism,<\/em> where the thought in the first part of the verse is contrasted with its opposite in the second (Ps 1:6; Prv 10:1-4, 16-18; 13:9). The third is <em>synthetic parallelism,<\/em> where the idea expressed in the first line of a verse is developed and completed in the following lines (Pss 1:1; 3:5-6; 18:8-10; Prv 26:3). There are more complicated forms of parallelism, but these three are the most common.<\/p>\n<p>Another characteristic of biblical poetry is the use of the letters of the Hebrew alphabet. Psalms in which verses are linked together by this means are called acrostic. Today, an acrostic is formed by taking a name and beginning the successive lines of the short poem with the letters that make up the name. The Hebrews took only the alphabet and arranged the lines of the poem according to the succession of the letters.<\/p>\n<p>Each line of a psalm may begin with a different letter, as in Psalm 25. Or each of the stanzas may begin with the same letter until all 22 letters of the alphabet are exhausted, as in Psalm 119. However, this psalm, which is the most conspicuous example of a Hebrew acrostic poem, is quite complicated in its arrangement. Not only does each stanza begin with a letter, but each of the eight lines of every stanza begins with the same letter, so that eight alphabetic arrangements move through the psalm in parallel lines. Other elaborate acrostics are Psalms 9, 10, 34, 37, 111, 112, and 145.<\/p>\n<p>The first four chapters of Lamentations also follow an acrostic arrangement. This example of acrostic arrangement is less noticeable to the English reader because the names of the Hebrew letters do not mark the beginning of the stanzas. In Lamentations 3 each letter of the alphabet begins three successive lines numbered as verses. Another acrostic occurs in Proverbs 31:10-31. It is an alphabetic description of the virtuous woman.<\/p>\n<p>Another poetic device giving unity to a poem and marking its divisions is the refrain. Psalm 136 is an outstanding example of this arrangement. The refrain is “His faithful love endures forever” and is used to conclude every verse.<\/p>\n<p>The meter of Hebraic poetry is dependent on accentuation; the unit is the couplet, in which the members may be of equal or varying length. Couplets are often arranged into strophes. The fundamental category of Hebrew poetry is the song or lyric. The song was accompanied by music (Gn 31:27; Ex 15:20; 1 Chr 25:6; Is 23:16; 30:29; Am 6:5) and could be associated with dance (Ex 15:20-21).<\/p>\n<p>Some complete poems in the OT are embedded in the narrative books and represent various types of Hebrew poems. The first recorded poem in the Bible is a battle song (Gn 4:23-24). Other famous examples of this type are the Song of Moses (Ex 15:1-18) and the Song of Deborah (Jgs 5:1-31). Then there is the Taunt Song (Nm 21:27-30), the Song of the Well (vv 17-18), and songs of blessing. Of this latter type, well-known examples are the Blessing of Jacob (Gn 49:1-27), the Blessing of Moses (Dt 33:2-29), and the four Blessings of Balaam (Nm 23:7-10; 23:18-24; 24:3-9; 24:15-24). There are also laments for the dead (2 Sm 1:19-27) and didactic poems that warn against improvidence (Prv 6:6-11) and drunkenness (23:29-35). Common throughout all of these various types of poems is religious emotion and fervor. The songs of Moses and Deborah praise God as the giver of victory.<\/p>\n<p>Most poems of distinctively religious fervor characterize the worship of the sanctuary. The psalms are religious poems sung with musical accompaniment. Many are private prayers, while others were composed for public worship, especially hymns of thanksgiving sung at the tabernacle or temple. It is in the Psalter that the soaring spirit of Hebrew poetry rises to a level never achieved by Israel’s pagan neighbors; the Hebrews worshiped God in spirit and in truth, and as they did so, they were giving expression to a personal experience of the living God in their soul.<\/p>\n<p>The internal qualities of Hebrew poetry are in part influenced by the age, social conditions, and environment in which the writers lived. Although the OT is of divine authorship, it also comes within the scope of literature and should be appreciated as such. Though the Holy Spirit inspired the message of the Hebrew writers, their individual writing styles remain clearly evident. Using simple and vivid diction, figures of speech, and literary devices, each poet expressed a wealth of religious thought, experience, and emotion; simile, metaphor, allegory, hyperbole, personification, irony, and wordplay all variously enhanced each writer’s pattern of thinking. Hebrew poetry is the expression of the poet’s human spirit, and it is the literature of revelation—the Word of God to humankind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The NT has a limited number of poetical passages. Probably the NT contains less poetry than the OT (relatively speaking) because the early Christians found the OT Psalter (in the Hebrew and LXX) adequate for their devotional purposes. All the writers of the NT were Jews, except Luke. He has given us some memorable poems: the Magnificat (Lk 1:46-55), the Benedictus (vv 68-79), and the Nunc Dimittis (2:29-32). Interestingly, these poems are strongly Hebraic in form, character, and content. Matthew has given us the poetic Beatitudes (Mt 5:3-12). These Beatitudes have the parallelism that is common in OT poetry—specifically, synthetic parallelism (where the second line of each verse completes the meaning of the first line). There is also a definite rhythmic quality in Matthew 11:28-30. John’s Prologue to his Gospel of John (1:1-18) is a fine example of Hellenistic poetry.<\/p>\n<p>The NT Epistles contain a number of poetic passages, especially in the doxologies (see, for example, Rom 16:25-27; Jude 1:24-25). Other sections are distinctly poetry and\/or early Christian hymns. These include Philippians 2:6-11 (“The Humility of Christ” hymn\/ poem); Colossians 1:15-20 (“The Preeminence of Christ” hymn\/poem); and 1 Timothy 3:16 (“The Incarnation” hymn\/poem). The writer to Hebrews also produced a noteworthy poetic prologue (1:1-3). Other sections of Paul’s writings display poetic language, where rhythm and exalted diction are prominent (see, for example, 1 Cor 13; 15:54-57).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Revelation also contains a number of poems of praise as well as hymns (see Rv 5:9-10, 12-13; 7:12; 11:17-18; 15:3-4).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ecclesiastes, Book of; Job, Book of; Lamentations, Book of; Music; Proverbs, Book of; Psalms, Book of; Song of Solomon; Wisdom; Wisdom Literature.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>POETRY, B<span>iblical<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Poetic language in Scripture.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT contains all that we know of the poetry of Israel, and what we have occupies an important place in that literature. It was presumably well known throughout the ancient Near East, for its fame had spread even to Babylon (Ps 137:3). Much of the OT is poetic in spirit and structure—a feature of the prophetic writings as well as the poetic literature. In the former are found passages of elevated poetry, studded with brilliant gems of imagery. The movement is rhythmical, with meter, parallelism, and strophic arrangement, as in the poetry books.<\/p>\n<p>The English Revised Version of the Bible (1881) first rendered a great service to English readers by printing OT poetry in parallel lines. Where this is not done in the prophetic literature, the poetic quality of these books is obscured. Note that besides the OT books recognized as poetry—the Psalms, Job, Lamentations, Song of Songs, and Proverbs—Ecclesiastes and the Prophets consist of prose and poetry. The historical books also contain fine examples of poetry.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew language was an ideal instrument for expressing poetic speech. Its simplicity of form combined intensity of feeling and pictorial power and allowed great play of imagination. Figures, metaphors, and hyperboles are extremely common. In its powerful imagery the genius of Hebrew poetry comes to its finest expression.<\/p>\n<p>The normal unit of Hebrew verse is the couplet of two parallel lines. But this is not the only grouping of lines in Hebrew poetry. Units of three (Pss 1:1; 5:11; 45:1-2), four (Pss 1:3; 55:21; Prv 27:15-16), five (Ps 6:6-7; Prv 24:23-25), six (Ps 99:1-3; Prv 30:21-23), and even larger combinations of parallel lines occur.<\/p>\n<p>As far as can be determined, meter is absent from biblical poetry. Certainly there is little concern for the careful meter that marks classic Greek and Latin, as well as much of English, poetry. The only exception is found in wailing songs or laments (Jer 9:18-20; Lam 1–4). This is called the lamentation meter, where the verse is in two parts. Rhyme also is so rare as to be almost nonexistent.<\/p>\n<p>On the other hand, Hebrew poetry is rhythmical—one of its distinguishing features. Its rhythm recurs with stressed and unstressed syllables in relatively regular succession. There are usually three or four accents or beats to a line, but the rhythmic unit is not uniform. Rhythm in Hebrew poetry, however, is not confined to the balance of accents or beats in a line. The meaning of the words and their position in the line are also significant—a feature called parallelism. This distinguishing characteristic was first clearly recognized by Dr. Robert Lowth, who in 1753 developed the principle of parallelism.<\/p>\n<p>He distinguished three types. The first is <em>synonymous parallelism,<\/em> where the thought expressed in the first part of the verse is repeated in the second part, in different but equivalent terms (Pss 2:4; 19:1; 36:1-2; 103:11-12; Prv 3:13-18). The second is <em>antithetic parallelism,<\/em> where the thought in the first part of the verse is contrasted with its opposite in the second (Ps 1:6; Prv 10:1-4, 16-18; 13:9). The third is <em>synthetic parallelism,<\/em> where the idea expressed in the first line of a verse is developed and completed in the following lines (Pss 1:1; 3:5-6; 18:8-10; Prv 26:3). There are more complicated forms of parallelism, but these three are the most common.<\/p>\n<p>Another characteristic of biblical poetry is the use of the letters of the Hebrew alphabet. Psalms in which verses are linked together by this means are called acrostic. Today, an acrostic is formed by taking a name and beginning the successive lines of the short poem with the letters that make up the name. The Hebrews took only the alphabet and arranged the lines of the poem according to the succession of the letters.<\/p>\n<p>Each line of a psalm may begin with a different letter, as in Psalm 25. Or each of the stanzas may begin with the same letter until all 22 letters of the alphabet are exhausted, as in Psalm 119. However, this psalm, which is the most conspicuous example of a Hebrew acrostic poem, is quite complicated in its arrangement. Not only does each stanza begin with a letter, but each of the eight lines of every stanza begins with the same letter, so that eight alphabetic arrangements move through the psalm in parallel lines. Other elaborate acrostics are Psalms 9, 10, 34, 37, 111, 112, and 145.<\/p>\n<p>The first four chapters of Lamentations also follow an acrostic arrangement. This example of acrostic arrangement is less noticeable to the English reader because the names of the Hebrew letters do not mark the beginning of the stanzas. In Lamentations 3 each letter of the alphabet begins three successive lines numbered as verses. Another acrostic occurs in Proverbs 31:10-31. It is an alphabetic description of the virtuous woman.<\/p>\n<p>Another poetic device giving unity to a poem and marking its divisions is the refrain. Psalm 136 is an outstanding example of this arrangement. The refrain is “His faithful love endures forever” and is used to conclude every verse.<\/p>\n<p>The meter of Hebraic poetry is dependent on accentuation; the unit is the couplet, in which the members may be of equal or varying length. Couplets are often arranged into strophes. The fundamental category of Hebrew poetry is the song or lyric. The song was accompanied by music (Gn 31:27; Ex 15:20; 1 Chr 25:6; Is 23:16; 30:29; Am 6:5) and could be associated with dance (Ex 15:20-21).<\/p>\n<p>Some complete poems in the OT are embedded in the narrative books and represent various types of Hebrew poems. The first recorded poem in the Bible is a battle song (Gn 4:23-24). Other famous examples of this type are the Song of Moses (Ex 15:1-18) and the Song of Deborah (Jgs 5:1-31). Then there is the Taunt Song (Nm 21:27-30), the Song of the Well (vv 17-18), and songs of blessing. Of this latter type, well-known examples are the Blessing of Jacob (Gn 49:1-27), the Blessing of Moses (Dt 33:2-29), and the four Blessings of Balaam (Nm 23:7-10; 23:18-24; 24:3-9; 24:15-24). There are also laments for the dead (2 Sm 1:19-27) and didactic poems that warn against improvidence (Prv 6:6-11) and drunkenness (23:29-35). Common throughout all of these various types of poems is religious emotion and fervor. The songs of Moses and Deborah praise God as the giver of victory.<\/p>\n<p>Most poems of distinctively religious fervor characterize the worship of the sanctuary. The psalms are religious poems sung with musical accompaniment. Many are private prayers, while others were composed for public worship, especially hymns of thanksgiving sung at the tabernacle or temple. It is in the Psalter that the soaring spirit of Hebrew poetry rises to a level never achieved by Israel’s pagan neighbors; the Hebrews worshiped God in spirit and in truth, and as they did so, they were giving expression to a personal experience of the living God in their soul.<\/p>\n<p>The internal qualities of Hebrew poetry are in part influenced by the age, social conditions, and environment in which the writers lived. Although the OT is of divine authorship, it also comes within the scope of literature and should be appreciated as such. Though the Holy Spirit inspired the message of the Hebrew writers, their individual writing styles remain clearly evident. Using simple and vivid diction, figures of speech, and literary devices, each poet expressed a wealth of religious thought, experience, and emotion; simile, metaphor, allegory, hyperbole, personification, irony, and wordplay all variously enhanced each writer’s pattern of thinking. Hebrew poetry is the expression of the poet’s human spirit, and it is the literature of revelation—the Word of God to humankind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The NT has a limited number of poetical passages. Probably the NT contains less poetry than the OT (relatively speaking) because the early Christians found the OT Psalter (in the Hebrew and LXX) adequate for their devotional purposes. All the writers of the NT were Jews, except Luke. He has given us some memorable poems: the Magnificat (Lk 1:46-55), the Benedictus (vv 68-79), and the Nunc Dimittis (2:29-32). Interestingly, these poems are strongly Hebraic in form, character, and content. Matthew has given us the poetic Beatitudes (Mt 5:3-12). These Beatitudes have the parallelism that is common in OT poetry—specifically, synthetic parallelism (where the second line of each verse completes the meaning of the first line). There is also a definite rhythmic quality in Matthew 11:28-30. John’s Prologue to his Gospel of John (1:1-18) is a fine example of Hellenistic poetry.<\/p>\n<p>The NT Epistles contain a number of poetic passages, especially in the doxologies (see, for example, Rom 16:25-27; Jude 1:24-25). Other sections are distinctly poetry and\/or early Christian hymns. These include Philippians 2:6-11 (“The Humility of Christ” hymn\/ poem); Colossians 1:15-20 (“The Preeminence of Christ” hymn\/poem); and 1 Timothy 3:16 (“The Incarnation” hymn\/poem). The writer to Hebrews also produced a noteworthy poetic prologue (1:1-3). Other sections of Paul’s writings display poetic language, where rhythm and exalted diction are prominent (see, for example, 1 Cor 13; 15:54-57).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Revelation also contains a number of poems of praise as well as hymns (see Rv 5:9-10, 12-13; 7:12; 11:17-18; 15:3-4).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ecclesiastes, Book of; Job, Book of; Lamentations, Book of; Music; Proverbs, Book of; Psalms, Book of; Song of Solomon; Wisdom; Wisdom Literature.<\/p>","summary_ro":"POETRY, Biblical Poetic language in Scripture. In the Old Testament The OT contains all that we know of the poetry of Israel, and what we have occupies an important place in that literature. It was presumably well known throughout the ancient Near East, for its fame had spread even to Babylon (Ps 137:3). Much of the OT is poetic in spirit and structure—a feature of the prophetic writings as well as the poetic literature. In the former are found passages of elevated poetry, studded with brilli...","summary_en":"POETRY, Biblical Poetic language in Scripture. In the Old Testament The OT contains all that we know of the poetry of Israel, and what we have occupies an important place in that literature. It was presumably well known throughout the ancient Near East, for its fame had spread even to Babylon (Ps 137:3). Much of the OT is poetic in spirit and structure—a feature of the prophetic writings as well as the poetic literature. In the former are found passages of elevated poetry, studded with brilli...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":36316,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Stoicism*, Stoics","title_en":"Stoicism*, Stoics","content_ro":"<h3>STOICISM*, STOICS<\/h3>\n<p>A widespread Greek philosophy, well represented in the audience at Athens listening to Paul (Acts 17:16-34). The apostle was probably familiar with it, for it had begun in Athens around 300 <span>BC<\/span>, with Zeno’s teaching in the “stoa” (porches) of public buildings, and had spread throughout the Greco-Roman world. It was known, for example, at Tarsus and on the island of Cyprus, so that Paul would no doubt have encountered Stoics earlier in his journeys and possibly even in his hometown. The scope and power of its influence are indicated by the fact that the Roman emperor Marcus Aurelius (d. <span>AD<\/span> 180) was himself a Stoic, some of whose philosophical writings have survived.<\/p>\n<p>The earliest Stoics were primarily concerned with cosmology, that is, the study of nature’s origin and its laws. They were materialists, who held that all things come from the one basic element of fire and will eventually return to that one element in a vast cosmic conflagration. They, therefore, had a cyclical view of cosmic history, in which one universe after another arises and is destroyed. Both the orderliness of things as we know them, and this cyclical pattern of history, were ascribed to the organizing and sustaining power of a pervasive force known as the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Logos<\/span> that is sometimes regarded as divine. Its laws were the laws of nature to which all creatures must conform. It gives to all things their essential nature and so gives life and reason to men. In fact, the Logos is in man, taking the form of the human soul. Hence, to live according to reason is to live according to the natural order of things, and this is good. Conscious obedience to natural law liberates a man from fear and concern about external circumstances over which he has no control but which are still ruled by nature’s laws. The good life, then, is one in which reason, not passion, rules, and peace of mind and harmony with nature consequently prevail.<\/p>\n<p>Stoic ideas proved attractive to some Christians because of the apparent similarities between the Stoic logos and the Logos of John 1:1-18, and between the idea of natural law and the law of God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Epicureans; Philosophy.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>STOICISM*, STOICS<\/h3>\n<p>A widespread Greek philosophy, well represented in the audience at Athens listening to Paul (Acts 17:16-34). The apostle was probably familiar with it, for it had begun in Athens around 300 <span>BC<\/span>, with Zeno’s teaching in the “stoa” (porches) of public buildings, and had spread throughout the Greco-Roman world. It was known, for example, at Tarsus and on the island of Cyprus, so that Paul would no doubt have encountered Stoics earlier in his journeys and possibly even in his hometown. The scope and power of its influence are indicated by the fact that the Roman emperor Marcus Aurelius (d. <span>AD<\/span> 180) was himself a Stoic, some of whose philosophical writings have survived.<\/p>\n<p>The earliest Stoics were primarily concerned with cosmology, that is, the study of nature’s origin and its laws. They were materialists, who held that all things come from the one basic element of fire and will eventually return to that one element in a vast cosmic conflagration. They, therefore, had a cyclical view of cosmic history, in which one universe after another arises and is destroyed. Both the orderliness of things as we know them, and this cyclical pattern of history, were ascribed to the organizing and sustaining power of a pervasive force known as the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Logos<\/span> that is sometimes regarded as divine. Its laws were the laws of nature to which all creatures must conform. It gives to all things their essential nature and so gives life and reason to men. In fact, the Logos is in man, taking the form of the human soul. Hence, to live according to reason is to live according to the natural order of things, and this is good. Conscious obedience to natural law liberates a man from fear and concern about external circumstances over which he has no control but which are still ruled by nature’s laws. The good life, then, is one in which reason, not passion, rules, and peace of mind and harmony with nature consequently prevail.<\/p>\n<p>Stoic ideas proved attractive to some Christians because of the apparent similarities between the Stoic logos and the Logos of John 1:1-18, and between the idea of natural law and the law of God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Epicureans; Philosophy.<\/p>","summary_ro":"STOICISM*, STOICS A widespread Greek philosophy, well represented in the audience at Athens listening to Paul (Acts 17:16-34). The apostle was probably familiar with it, for it had begun in Athens around 300 BC, with Zeno’s teaching in the “stoa” (porches) of public buildings, and had spread throughout the Greco-Roman world. It was known, for example, at Tarsus and on the island of Cyprus, so that Paul would no doubt have encountered Stoics earlier in his journeys and possibly even in his hom...","summary_en":"STOICISM*, STOICS A widespread Greek philosophy, well represented in the audience at Athens listening to Paul (Acts 17:16-34). The apostle was probably familiar with it, for it had begun in Athens around 300 BC, with Zeno’s teaching in the “stoa” (porches) of public buildings, and had spread throughout the Greco-Roman world. It was known, for example, at Tarsus and on the island of Cyprus, so that Paul would no doubt have encountered Stoics earlier in his journeys and possibly even in his hom...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":40048,"type":"textbox","type_label":"Notă explicativă","type_icon":"💡","type_color":"#8b5cf6","title_ro":"English Translations: Ancient and Modern\/John 1:1-5","title_en":"Translations: Ancient and Modern\/John 1:1-5, English","content_ro":"<h3>English Translations: Ancient and Modern\/John 1:1-5<\/h3>\n<blockquote><p>Tyndale’s Translation<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>In the beginnynge was the worde, and the worde was with God: and the worde was God. The same was in the beginnynge with God. All things were made by it, and with out it, was made nothinge, that was made. In it was lyfe, and the lyfe was the lyghte of men, and the lyghte shyneth in the darckness, but the darckness comprehended it not.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>King James Version<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p><sup class=\"verse-num\">1<\/sup>In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. <sup class=\"verse-num\">2<\/sup>The same was in the beginning with God. <sup class=\"verse-num\">3<\/sup>All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. <sup class=\"verse-num\">4<\/sup>In him was life; and the life was the light of men. <sup class=\"verse-num\">5<\/sup>And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>American Standard Version<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p><sup class=\"verse-num\">1<\/sup>In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. <sup class=\"verse-num\">2<\/sup>The same was in the beginning with God. <sup class=\"verse-num\">3<\/sup>All things were made through him; and without him was not anything made that hath been made. <sup class=\"verse-num\">4<\/sup>In him was life; and the life was the light of men. <sup class=\"verse-num\">5<\/sup>And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness apprehended it not.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>Revised Standard Version<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p><sup class=\"verse-num\">1<\/sup>In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. <sup class=\"verse-num\">2<\/sup>He was in the beginning with God; <sup class=\"verse-num\">3<\/sup>all things were made through him; and without him was not anything made that was made. <sup class=\"verse-num\">4<\/sup>In him was life, and the life was the light of men. <sup class=\"verse-num\">5<\/sup>The light shines in the darkness; and the darkness has not overcome it.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p><em>New American Standard Bible<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p><sup class=\"verse-num\">1<\/sup>In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p><sup class=\"verse-num\">2<\/sup>He was in the beginning with God.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p><sup class=\"verse-num\">3<\/sup>All things came into being by Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p><sup class=\"verse-num\">4<\/sup>In Him was life, and the life was the light of men.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p><sup class=\"verse-num\">5<\/sup>And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehended it.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>New International Version<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p><sup class=\"verse-num\">1<\/sup>In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. <sup class=\"verse-num\">2<\/sup>He was with God in the beginning.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p><sup class=\"verse-num\">3<\/sup>Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. <sup class=\"verse-num\">4<\/sup>In him was life, and that life was the light of men. <sup class=\"verse-num\">5<\/sup>The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Today’s English Version<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p><sup class=\"verse-num\">1<\/sup>Before the world was created, the Word already existed; he was with God, and he was the same as God. <sup class=\"verse-num\">2<\/sup>From the very beginning the Word was with God. <sup class=\"verse-num\">3<\/sup>Through him God made all things; not one thing in all creation was made without him. <sup class=\"verse-num\">4<\/sup>The Word was the source of life, and this life brought light to mankind. <sup class=\"verse-num\">5<\/sup>The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has never put it out.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p><em>The Living Bible<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p><sup class=\"verse-num\">1-2<\/sup>Before anything else existed, there was Christ, with God. He has always been alive and is himself God. <sup class=\"verse-num\">3<\/sup>He created everything there is—nothing exists that he didn’t make. <sup class=\"verse-num\">4<\/sup>Eternal life is in him, and this life gives light to all mankind. <sup class=\"verse-num\">5<\/sup>His life is the light that shines through the darkness—and the darkness can never extinguish it.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p><em>New English Bible<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>When all things began, the Word already was. The Word dwelt with God, and what God was, the Word was. The Word, then, was with God at the beginning, and through him all things came to be; no single thing was created without him. All that came to be was alive with his life, and that lifew was the light of men. The light shines on in the dark, and the darkness has never mastered it.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>New Living Translation<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p><sup class=\"verse-num\">1<\/sup>In the beginning the Word already existed.<\/p>\n<p>The Word was with God,<\/p>\n<p>and the Word was God.<\/p>\n<p><sup class=\"verse-num\">2<\/sup>He existed in the beginning with God.<\/p>\n<p><sup class=\"verse-num\">3<\/sup>God created everything through him,<\/p>\n<p>and nothing was created except through him.<\/p>\n<p><sup class=\"verse-num\">4<\/sup>The Word gave life to everything that was created,<\/p>\n<p>and his life brought light to everyone.<\/p>\n<p><sup class=\"verse-num\">5<\/sup>The light shines in the darkness,<\/p>\n<p>and the darkness can never extinguish it.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p><em>The New Jerusalem Bible<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p><sup class=\"verse-num\">1<\/sup>In the beginning was the Word:<\/p>\n<p>the Word was with God,<\/p>\n<p>and the Word was God.<\/p>\n<p><sup class=\"verse-num\">2<\/sup>He was with God in the beginning.<\/p>\n<p><sup class=\"verse-num\">3<\/sup>Through him all things came into being,<\/p>\n<p>not one thing came into being except through him.<\/p>\n<p><sup class=\"verse-num\">4<\/sup>What has come into being in him was life,<\/p>\n<p>life that was the light of men;<\/p>\n<p><sup class=\"verse-num\">5<\/sup>And light shines in darkness,<\/p>\n<p>and darkness could not overpower it.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p><em>The New American Bible<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p><sup class=\"verse-num\">1<\/sup>In the beginning was the Word,<\/p>\n<p>and the Word was with God,<\/p>\n<p>and the Word was God.<\/p>\n<p><sup class=\"verse-num\">2<\/sup>He was in the beginning with God.<\/p>\n<p><sup class=\"verse-num\">3<\/sup>All things came to be through him,<\/p>\n<p>and without him nothing came to be.<\/p>\n<p>What came to be <sup class=\"verse-num\">4<\/sup>through him was life,<\/p>\n<p>and this life was the light of the human race;<\/p>\n<p><sup class=\"verse-num\">5<\/sup>the light shines in the darkness,<\/p>\n<p>and the darkness has not overcome it.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>New Revised Standard Version<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p><sup class=\"verse-num\">1<\/sup>In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. <sup class=\"verse-num\">2<\/sup>He was in the beginning with God. <sup class=\"verse-num\">3<\/sup>All things came into being through him, and without him not one thing came into being. What has come into being <sup class=\"verse-num\">4<\/sup>in him was life, and the life was the light of all people. <sup class=\"verse-num\">5<\/sup>The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not overcome it.<\/p><\/blockquote>","content_en":"<h3>English Translations: Ancient and Modern\/John 1:1-5<\/h3>\n<blockquote><p>Tyndale’s Translation<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>In the beginnynge was the worde, and the worde was with God: and the worde was God. The same was in the beginnynge with God. All things were made by it, and with out it, was made nothinge, that was made. In it was lyfe, and the lyfe was the lyghte of men, and the lyghte shyneth in the darckness, but the darckness comprehended it not.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>King James Version<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p><sup class=\"verse-num\">1<\/sup>In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. <sup class=\"verse-num\">2<\/sup>The same was in the beginning with God. <sup class=\"verse-num\">3<\/sup>All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. <sup class=\"verse-num\">4<\/sup>In him was life; and the life was the light of men. <sup class=\"verse-num\">5<\/sup>And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>American Standard Version<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p><sup class=\"verse-num\">1<\/sup>In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. <sup class=\"verse-num\">2<\/sup>The same was in the beginning with God. <sup class=\"verse-num\">3<\/sup>All things were made through him; and without him was not anything made that hath been made. <sup class=\"verse-num\">4<\/sup>In him was life; and the life was the light of men. <sup class=\"verse-num\">5<\/sup>And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness apprehended it not.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>Revised Standard Version<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p><sup class=\"verse-num\">1<\/sup>In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. <sup class=\"verse-num\">2<\/sup>He was in the beginning with God; <sup class=\"verse-num\">3<\/sup>all things were made through him; and without him was not anything made that was made. <sup class=\"verse-num\">4<\/sup>In him was life, and the life was the light of men. <sup class=\"verse-num\">5<\/sup>The light shines in the darkness; and the darkness has not overcome it.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p><em>New American Standard Bible<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p><sup class=\"verse-num\">1<\/sup>In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p><sup class=\"verse-num\">2<\/sup>He was in the beginning with God.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p><sup class=\"verse-num\">3<\/sup>All things came into being by Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p><sup class=\"verse-num\">4<\/sup>In Him was life, and the life was the light of men.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p><sup class=\"verse-num\">5<\/sup>And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehended it.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>New International Version<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p><sup class=\"verse-num\">1<\/sup>In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. <sup class=\"verse-num\">2<\/sup>He was with God in the beginning.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p><sup class=\"verse-num\">3<\/sup>Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. <sup class=\"verse-num\">4<\/sup>In him was life, and that life was the light of men. <sup class=\"verse-num\">5<\/sup>The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Today’s English Version<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p><sup class=\"verse-num\">1<\/sup>Before the world was created, the Word already existed; he was with God, and he was the same as God. <sup class=\"verse-num\">2<\/sup>From the very beginning the Word was with God. <sup class=\"verse-num\">3<\/sup>Through him God made all things; not one thing in all creation was made without him. <sup class=\"verse-num\">4<\/sup>The Word was the source of life, and this life brought light to mankind. <sup class=\"verse-num\">5<\/sup>The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has never put it out.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p><em>The Living Bible<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p><sup class=\"verse-num\">1-2<\/sup>Before anything else existed, there was Christ, with God. He has always been alive and is himself God. <sup class=\"verse-num\">3<\/sup>He created everything there is—nothing exists that he didn’t make. <sup class=\"verse-num\">4<\/sup>Eternal life is in him, and this life gives light to all mankind. <sup class=\"verse-num\">5<\/sup>His life is the light that shines through the darkness—and the darkness can never extinguish it.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p><em>New English Bible<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>When all things began, the Word already was. The Word dwelt with God, and what God was, the Word was. The Word, then, was with God at the beginning, and through him all things came to be; no single thing was created without him. All that came to be was alive with his life, and that lifew was the light of men. The light shines on in the dark, and the darkness has never mastered it.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>New Living Translation<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p><sup class=\"verse-num\">1<\/sup>In the beginning the Word already existed.<\/p>\n<p>The Word was with God,<\/p>\n<p>and the Word was God.<\/p>\n<p><sup class=\"verse-num\">2<\/sup>He existed in the beginning with God.<\/p>\n<p><sup class=\"verse-num\">3<\/sup>God created everything through him,<\/p>\n<p>and nothing was created except through him.<\/p>\n<p><sup class=\"verse-num\">4<\/sup>The Word gave life to everything that was created,<\/p>\n<p>and his life brought light to everyone.<\/p>\n<p><sup class=\"verse-num\">5<\/sup>The light shines in the darkness,<\/p>\n<p>and the darkness can never extinguish it.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p><em>The New Jerusalem Bible<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p><sup class=\"verse-num\">1<\/sup>In the beginning was the Word:<\/p>\n<p>the Word was with God,<\/p>\n<p>and the Word was God.<\/p>\n<p><sup class=\"verse-num\">2<\/sup>He was with God in the beginning.<\/p>\n<p><sup class=\"verse-num\">3<\/sup>Through him all things came into being,<\/p>\n<p>not one thing came into being except through him.<\/p>\n<p><sup class=\"verse-num\">4<\/sup>What has come into being in him was life,<\/p>\n<p>life that was the light of men;<\/p>\n<p><sup class=\"verse-num\">5<\/sup>And light shines in darkness,<\/p>\n<p>and darkness could not overpower it.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p><em>The New American Bible<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p><sup class=\"verse-num\">1<\/sup>In the beginning was the Word,<\/p>\n<p>and the Word was with God,<\/p>\n<p>and the Word was God.<\/p>\n<p><sup class=\"verse-num\">2<\/sup>He was in the beginning with God.<\/p>\n<p><sup class=\"verse-num\">3<\/sup>All things came to be through him,<\/p>\n<p>and without him nothing came to be.<\/p>\n<p>What came to be <sup class=\"verse-num\">4<\/sup>through him was life,<\/p>\n<p>and this life was the light of the human race;<\/p>\n<p><sup class=\"verse-num\">5<\/sup>the light shines in the darkness,<\/p>\n<p>and the darkness has not overcome it.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>New Revised Standard Version<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p><sup class=\"verse-num\">1<\/sup>In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. <sup class=\"verse-num\">2<\/sup>He was in the beginning with God. <sup class=\"verse-num\">3<\/sup>All things came into being through him, and without him not one thing came into being. What has come into being <sup class=\"verse-num\">4<\/sup>in him was life, and the life was the light of all people. <sup class=\"verse-num\">5<\/sup>The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not overcome it.<\/p><\/blockquote>","summary_ro":"English Translations: Ancient and Modern\/John 1:1-5 Tyndale’s Translation In the beginnynge was the worde, and the worde was with God: and the worde was God. The same was in the beginnynge with God. All things were made by it, and with out it, was made nothinge, that was made. In it was lyfe, and the lyfe was the lyghte of men, and the lyghte shyneth in the darckness, but the darckness comprehended it not. King James Version 1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the W...","summary_en":"English Translations: Ancient and Modern\/John 1:1-5 Tyndale’s Translation In the beginnynge was the worde, and the worde was with God: and the worde was God. The same was in the beginnynge with God. All things were made by it, and with out it, was made nothinge, that was made. In it was lyfe, and the lyfe was the lyghte of men, and the lyghte shyneth in the darckness, but the darckness comprehended it not. King James Version 1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the W...","source":"Textboxes\/Textboxes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":40447,"type":"picture","type_label":"Imagine","type_icon":"🖼️","type_color":"#ec4899","title_ro":"The Title “Word” in John 1:1","title_en":"The Title “Word” in John 1:1","content_ro":"<p><\/p>\n <p><strong>The Title “Word” in John 1:1<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The first lines of John’s Gospel, showing the Greek title<\/p>","content_en":"<p><\/p>\n <p><strong>The Title “Word” in John 1:1<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The first lines of John’s Gospel, showing the Greek title<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Title “Word” in John 1:1 The first lines of John’s Gospel, showing the Greek title","summary_en":"The Title “Word” in John 1:1 The first lines of John’s Gospel, showing the Greek title","source":"Pictures\/Pictures.xml","external_url":"..\/Pictures\/artfiles\/word.jpg","has_map":false,"has_picture":true},{"id":56305,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:1","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:1-18<\/strong> The beginning of this prologue (1:1-5) might be a poem or hymn sung by the earliest Christians. The prologue’s themes—the coming of the light into the world, the rejection of the light, and its gift of new life to believers—prepares readers for the story that follows.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:1-18<\/strong> The beginning of this prologue (1:1-5) might be a poem or hymn sung by the earliest Christians. The prologue’s themes—the coming of the light into the world, the rejection of the light, and its gift of new life to believers—prepares readers for the story that follows.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:1-18 The beginning of this prologue (1:1-5) might be a poem or hymn sung by the earliest Christians. The prologue’s themes—the coming of the light into the world, the rejection of the light, and its gift of new life to believers—prepares readers for the story that follows.","summary_en":"1:1-18 The beginning of this prologue (1:1-5) might be a poem or hymn sung by the earliest Christians. The prologue’s themes—the coming of the light into the world, the rejection of the light, and its gift of new life to believers—prepares readers for the story that follows.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56306,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:1","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>1:1<\/strong> Echoing Gen 1:1, John’s Gospel introduces Jesus Christ, through whom God created everything (John 1:3); Jesus also creates new life in those who believe (1:12-13). The Gospel opens with its central affirmation, that Jesus Christ, <em>the Word<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span>), not only revealed God but <em>was God<\/em><em>.<\/em> In Greek thought, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> was the rational principle guiding the universe and making life coherent. For Jewish people, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> was the word of the Lord, an expression of God’s wisdom and creative power. By Jesus’ time, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> was viewed as coming from God and having his personality (see Ps 33:6, 9; Prov 8:22-31); John affirmed this understanding (John 1:14).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>1:1<\/strong> Echoing Gen 1:1, John’s Gospel introduces Jesus Christ, through whom God created everything (John 1:3); Jesus also creates new life in those who believe (1:12-13). The Gospel opens with its central affirmation, that Jesus Christ, <em>the Word<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span>), not only revealed God but <em>was God<\/em><em>.<\/em> In Greek thought, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> was the rational principle guiding the universe and making life coherent. For Jewish people, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> was the word of the Lord, an expression of God’s wisdom and creative power. By Jesus’ time, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> was viewed as coming from God and having his personality (see Ps 33:6, 9; Prov 8:22-31); John affirmed this understanding (John 1:14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:1 Echoing Gen 1:1, John’s Gospel introduces Jesus Christ, through whom God created everything (John 1:3); Jesus also creates new life in those who believe (1:12-13). The Gospel opens with its central affirmation, that Jesus Christ, the Word (Greek logos), not only revealed God but was God. In Greek thought, the logos was the rational principle guiding the universe and making life coherent. For Jewish people, the logos was the word of the Lord, an expression of God’s wisdom and creative powe...","summary_en":"1:1 Echoing Gen 1:1, John’s Gospel introduces Jesus Christ, through whom God created everything (John 1:3); Jesus also creates new life in those who believe (1:12-13). The Gospel opens with its central affirmation, that Jesus Christ, the Word (Greek logos), not only revealed God but was God. In Greek thought, the logos was the rational principle guiding the universe and making life coherent. For Jewish people, the logos was the word of the Lord, an expression of God’s wisdom and creative powe...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83931,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:1","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:1-18<\/strong> The beginning of this prologue (1:1-5) might be a poem or hymn sung by the earliest Christians. The prologue’s themes—the coming of the light into the world, the rejection of the light, and its gift of new life to believers—prepares readers for the story that follows.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:1-18<\/strong> The beginning of this prologue (1:1-5) might be a poem or hymn sung by the earliest Christians. The prologue’s themes—the coming of the light into the world, the rejection of the light, and its gift of new life to believers—prepares readers for the story that follows.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:1-18 The beginning of this prologue (1:1-5) might be a poem or hymn sung by the earliest Christians. The prologue’s themes—the coming of the light into the world, the rejection of the light, and its gift of new life to believers—prepares readers for the story that follows.","summary_en":"1:1-18 The beginning of this prologue (1:1-5) might be a poem or hymn sung by the earliest Christians. The prologue’s themes—the coming of the light into the world, the rejection of the light, and its gift of new life to believers—prepares readers for the story that follows.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83932,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:1","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>1:1<\/strong> Echoing Gen 1:1, John’s Gospel introduces Jesus Christ, through whom God created everything (John 1:3); Jesus also creates new life in those who believe (1:12-13). The Gospel opens with its central affirmation, that Jesus Christ, <em>the Word<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span>), not only revealed God but <em>was God<\/em><em>.<\/em> In Greek thought, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> was the rational principle guiding the universe and making life coherent. For Jewish people, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> was the word of the Lord, an expression of God’s wisdom and creative power. By Jesus’ time, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> was viewed as coming from God and having his personality (see Ps 33:6, 9; Prov 8:22-31); John affirmed this understanding (John 1:14).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>1:1<\/strong> Echoing Gen 1:1, John’s Gospel introduces Jesus Christ, through whom God created everything (John 1:3); Jesus also creates new life in those who believe (1:12-13). The Gospel opens with its central affirmation, that Jesus Christ, <em>the Word<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span>), not only revealed God but <em>was God<\/em><em>.<\/em> In Greek thought, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> was the rational principle guiding the universe and making life coherent. For Jewish people, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> was the word of the Lord, an expression of God’s wisdom and creative power. By Jesus’ time, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> was viewed as coming from God and having his personality (see Ps 33:6, 9; Prov 8:22-31); John affirmed this understanding (John 1:14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:1 Echoing Gen 1:1, John’s Gospel introduces Jesus Christ, through whom God created everything (John 1:3); Jesus also creates new life in those who believe (1:12-13). The Gospel opens with its central affirmation, that Jesus Christ, the Word (Greek logos), not only revealed God but was God. In Greek thought, the logos was the rational principle guiding the universe and making life coherent. For Jewish people, the logos was the word of the Lord, an expression of God’s wisdom and creative powe...","summary_en":"1:1 Echoing Gen 1:1, John’s Gospel introduces Jesus Christ, through whom God created everything (John 1:3); Jesus also creates new life in those who believe (1:12-13). The Gospel opens with its central affirmation, that Jesus Christ, the Word (Greek logos), not only revealed God but was God. In Greek thought, the logos was the rational principle guiding the universe and making life coherent. For Jewish people, the logos was the word of the Lord, an expression of God’s wisdom and creative powe...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111557,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:1","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:1-18<\/strong> The beginning of this prologue (1:1-5) might be a poem or hymn sung by the earliest Christians. The prologue’s themes—the coming of the light into the world, the rejection of the light, and its gift of new life to believers—prepares readers for the story that follows.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:1-18<\/strong> The beginning of this prologue (1:1-5) might be a poem or hymn sung by the earliest Christians. The prologue’s themes—the coming of the light into the world, the rejection of the light, and its gift of new life to believers—prepares readers for the story that follows.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:1-18 The beginning of this prologue (1:1-5) might be a poem or hymn sung by the earliest Christians. The prologue’s themes—the coming of the light into the world, the rejection of the light, and its gift of new life to believers—prepares readers for the story that follows.","summary_en":"1:1-18 The beginning of this prologue (1:1-5) might be a poem or hymn sung by the earliest Christians. The prologue’s themes—the coming of the light into the world, the rejection of the light, and its gift of new life to believers—prepares readers for the story that follows.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111558,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:1","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>1:1<\/strong> Echoing Gen 1:1, John’s Gospel introduces Jesus Christ, through whom God created everything (John 1:3); Jesus also creates new life in those who believe (1:12-13). The Gospel opens with its central affirmation, that Jesus Christ, <em>the Word<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span>), not only revealed God but <em>was God<\/em><em>.<\/em> In Greek thought, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> was the rational principle guiding the universe and making life coherent. For Jewish people, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> was the word of the Lord, an expression of God’s wisdom and creative power. By Jesus’ time, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> was viewed as coming from God and having his personality (see Ps 33:6, 9; Prov 8:22-31); John affirmed this understanding (John 1:14).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>1:1<\/strong> Echoing Gen 1:1, John’s Gospel introduces Jesus Christ, through whom God created everything (John 1:3); Jesus also creates new life in those who believe (1:12-13). The Gospel opens with its central affirmation, that Jesus Christ, <em>the Word<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span>), not only revealed God but <em>was God<\/em><em>.<\/em> In Greek thought, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> was the rational principle guiding the universe and making life coherent. For Jewish people, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> was the word of the Lord, an expression of God’s wisdom and creative power. By Jesus’ time, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> was viewed as coming from God and having his personality (see Ps 33:6, 9; Prov 8:22-31); John affirmed this understanding (John 1:14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:1 Echoing Gen 1:1, John’s Gospel introduces Jesus Christ, through whom God created everything (John 1:3); Jesus also creates new life in those who believe (1:12-13). The Gospel opens with its central affirmation, that Jesus Christ, the Word (Greek logos), not only revealed God but was God. In Greek thought, the logos was the rational principle guiding the universe and making life coherent. For Jewish people, the logos was the word of the Lord, an expression of God’s wisdom and creative powe...","summary_en":"1:1 Echoing Gen 1:1, John’s Gospel introduces Jesus Christ, through whom God created everything (John 1:3); Jesus also creates new life in those who believe (1:12-13). The Gospel opens with its central affirmation, that Jesus Christ, the Word (Greek logos), not only revealed God but was God. In Greek thought, the logos was the rational principle guiding the universe and making life coherent. For Jewish people, the logos was the word of the Lord, an expression of God’s wisdom and creative powe...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139183,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:1","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:1-18<\/strong> The beginning of this prologue (1:1-5) might be a poem or hymn sung by the earliest Christians. The prologue’s themes—the coming of the light into the world, the rejection of the light, and its gift of new life to believers—prepares readers for the story that follows.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:1-18<\/strong> The beginning of this prologue (1:1-5) might be a poem or hymn sung by the earliest Christians. The prologue’s themes—the coming of the light into the world, the rejection of the light, and its gift of new life to believers—prepares readers for the story that follows.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:1-18 The beginning of this prologue (1:1-5) might be a poem or hymn sung by the earliest Christians. The prologue’s themes—the coming of the light into the world, the rejection of the light, and its gift of new life to believers—prepares readers for the story that follows.","summary_en":"1:1-18 The beginning of this prologue (1:1-5) might be a poem or hymn sung by the earliest Christians. The prologue’s themes—the coming of the light into the world, the rejection of the light, and its gift of new life to believers—prepares readers for the story that follows.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139184,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:1","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>1:1<\/strong> Echoing Gen 1:1, John’s Gospel introduces Jesus Christ, through whom God created everything (John 1:3); Jesus also creates new life in those who believe (1:12-13). The Gospel opens with its central affirmation, that Jesus Christ, <em>the Word<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span>), not only revealed God but <em>was God<\/em><em>.<\/em> In Greek thought, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> was the rational principle guiding the universe and making life coherent. For Jewish people, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> was the word of the Lord, an expression of God’s wisdom and creative power. By Jesus’ time, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> was viewed as coming from God and having his personality (see Ps 33:6, 9; Prov 8:22-31); John affirmed this understanding (John 1:14).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 10\"><strong>1:1<\/strong> Echoing Gen 1:1, John’s Gospel introduces Jesus Christ, through whom God created everything (John 1:3); Jesus also creates new life in those who believe (1:12-13). The Gospel opens with its central affirmation, that Jesus Christ, <em>the Word<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span>), not only revealed God but <em>was God<\/em><em>.<\/em> In Greek thought, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> was the rational principle guiding the universe and making life coherent. For Jewish people, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> was the word of the Lord, an expression of God’s wisdom and creative power. By Jesus’ time, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> was viewed as coming from God and having his personality (see Ps 33:6, 9; Prov 8:22-31); John affirmed this understanding (John 1:14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:1 Echoing Gen 1:1, John’s Gospel introduces Jesus Christ, through whom God created everything (John 1:3); Jesus also creates new life in those who believe (1:12-13). The Gospel opens with its central affirmation, that Jesus Christ, the Word (Greek logos), not only revealed God but was God. In Greek thought, the logos was the rational principle guiding the universe and making life coherent. For Jewish people, the logos was the word of the Lord, an expression of God’s wisdom and creative powe...","summary_en":"1:1 Echoing Gen 1:1, John’s Gospel introduces Jesus Christ, through whom God created everything (John 1:3); Jesus also creates new life in those who believe (1:12-13). The Gospel opens with its central affirmation, that Jesus Christ, the Word (Greek logos), not only revealed God but was God. In Greek thought, the logos was the rational principle guiding the universe and making life coherent. For Jewish people, the logos was the word of the Lord, an expression of God’s wisdom and creative powe...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":59669,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Creation","title_en":"The Creation","content_ro":"<h3>The Creation<\/h3>\n<p>The creation account is foundational to the message of the entire Bible. Understanding the early chapters of Genesis is thus crucial to forming a biblical worldview.<\/p>\n<p>These opening chapters deal with fundamental questions: Who created the world, and for what purpose? Why is the world in its present condition? Genesis answers these questions, dispelling the idolatry that Israel had acquired from their pagan masters in Egypt. In the Promised Land, the Israelites would again be surrounded by people who believed in false gods and worshiped created things rather than the Creator. Genesis taught Israel that the one true God created and has absolute authority over all things; he alone is worthy of worship.<\/p>\n<p>God transformed chaos into the present ordered cosmos. In the first three days, he transformed the formless void into the structured universe—the heavens, the water and sky, and the earth. In the second three days, he populated each realm. The seventh day, God’s day of rest, provides the weekly pattern for human activity and points forward to the rest that God promised to those who live by faith in him (see Heb 3:7–4:11).<\/p>\n<p>The creation account teaches that as God made the world, it was “very good” (Gen 1:31). In this environment, humans enjoyed unbroken fellowship with their Creator until their rebellion severed that fellowship and implanted evil in human hearts (see Gen 3–6). The world’s evil does not come from some defect in creation; rather, it stems from rebellion to God’s design and purposes.<\/p>\n<p>Since that first rebellion, humans have been alienated from the Creator and are prone to not recognize his presence and authority. This alienation results in shame, fractured relationships with God and other humans, estrangement from the rest of creation, and death (3:7-19). Since that time, God has been working purposefully in history to restore humans to fellowship with him, which he is doing through Jesus Christ. Restored humans are a new creation (see Gal 6:15); through Jesus, eternal life is open to all and God will one day renew all things (see Isa 65:17-25; Rom 8:19-22). The whole cosmos will be made new (Rev 21:1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:1–2:3; Ps 33:6-9; Prov 3:19; 8:22-31; Isa 40:26-28; 45:11-12, 18-19; Jer 10:11-16; John 1:1-4; Rom 8:18-25; 2 Cor 5:17; Col 1:15-20; Rev 4:11; 21:1-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Creation<\/h3>\n<p>The creation account is foundational to the message of the entire Bible. Understanding the early chapters of Genesis is thus crucial to forming a biblical worldview.<\/p>\n<p>These opening chapters deal with fundamental questions: Who created the world, and for what purpose? Why is the world in its present condition? Genesis answers these questions, dispelling the idolatry that Israel had acquired from their pagan masters in Egypt. In the Promised Land, the Israelites would again be surrounded by people who believed in false gods and worshiped created things rather than the Creator. Genesis taught Israel that the one true God created and has absolute authority over all things; he alone is worthy of worship.<\/p>\n<p>God transformed chaos into the present ordered cosmos. In the first three days, he transformed the formless void into the structured universe—the heavens, the water and sky, and the earth. In the second three days, he populated each realm. The seventh day, God’s day of rest, provides the weekly pattern for human activity and points forward to the rest that God promised to those who live by faith in him (see Heb 3:7–4:11).<\/p>\n<p>The creation account teaches that as God made the world, it was “very good” (Gen 1:31). In this environment, humans enjoyed unbroken fellowship with their Creator until their rebellion severed that fellowship and implanted evil in human hearts (see Gen 3–6). The world’s evil does not come from some defect in creation; rather, it stems from rebellion to God’s design and purposes.<\/p>\n<p>Since that first rebellion, humans have been alienated from the Creator and are prone to not recognize his presence and authority. This alienation results in shame, fractured relationships with God and other humans, estrangement from the rest of creation, and death (3:7-19). Since that time, God has been working purposefully in history to restore humans to fellowship with him, which he is doing through Jesus Christ. Restored humans are a new creation (see Gal 6:15); through Jesus, eternal life is open to all and God will one day renew all things (see Isa 65:17-25; Rom 8:19-22). The whole cosmos will be made new (Rev 21:1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:1–2:3; Ps 33:6-9; Prov 3:19; 8:22-31; Isa 40:26-28; 45:11-12, 18-19; Jer 10:11-16; John 1:1-4; Rom 8:18-25; 2 Cor 5:17; Col 1:15-20; Rev 4:11; 21:1-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Creation The creation account is foundational to the message of the entire Bible. Understanding the early chapters of Genesis is thus crucial to forming a biblical worldview. These opening chapters deal with fundamental questions: Who created the world, and for what purpose? Why is the world in its present condition? Genesis answers these questions, dispelling the idolatry that Israel had acquired from their pagan masters in Egypt. In the Promised Land, the Israelites would again be surro...","summary_en":"The Creation The creation account is foundational to the message of the entire Bible. Understanding the early chapters of Genesis is thus crucial to forming a biblical worldview. These opening chapters deal with fundamental questions: Who created the world, and for what purpose? Why is the world in its present condition? Genesis answers these questions, dispelling the idolatry that Israel had acquired from their pagan masters in Egypt. In the Promised Land, the Israelites would again be surro...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":63255,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Darkness and Light","title_en":"Darkness and Light","content_ro":"<h3>Darkness and Light<\/h3>\n<h5>Darkness<\/h5>\n<p>Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 <em>\/\/<\/em> 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sam 22:10 <em>\/\/<\/em> Ps 18:9). God is unknowable unless he reveals himself.<\/p>\n<p>Darkness often stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gen 15:12; Job 12:25; 19:8; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Isa 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>For Job, darkness was like nothingness (Job 3:4-6). It points to death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Job 10:21-22; 17:12-13; Eccl 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>Evil takes place under the cover of darkness (Job 24:16-17), but darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Ps 139:11-12; Isa 29:15-16). Darkness often depicts ignorance of God’s will: Knowledge of God is “light,” so lack of knowledge is “darkness” (Job 12:24-25; Matt 4:16; John 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11). Moral depravity is described as darkness (Prov 2:13; 4:19; Isa 5:20; 60:2). In the New Testament, darkness is also a metaphor for spiritual ignorance (Matt 4:16; 6:23; Luke 1:79; 11:35; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13). Those who come to know God come out of darkness (Isa 9:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of the Old Testament prophets was the Day of the Lord, which was often associated with darkness (Ezek 32:8; Joel 2:2, 31; Amos 5:18, 20; Zeph 1:15). The New Testament also links darkness with judgment (Matt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pet 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13).<\/p>\n<h5>Light<\/h5>\n<p>Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gen 1:3; see also 1:16). It is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting (Eccl 11:7; Jas 1:17). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led by a pillar of cloud and fire that gave them light (Exod 13:21; 14:20) and showed them the way to go (Neh 9:19). Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord (Job 12:22; 29:2-3; Pss 4:6; 18:28; 44:3; 118:27). God’s servants can extend this blessing by being a light to guide others (Isa 42:6; 49:6). God’s light also exposes sin and brings justice (see Ps 90:8; Isa 51:4).<\/p>\n<p>God himself is described as light (Ps 27:1; Isa 60:19-20; Dan 2:22; 1 Jn 1:5), and he dwells in unapproachable light (see 1 Tim 6:16). Yet he brings his servants into the light (Mic 7:8-9; see also 1 Jn 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). He brought a revelation (light) from God, but he was more than a revealer—he was himself that revelation (John 1:1-10). Those who receive Jesus, who believe in the Light, receive the right to become children of God (John 1:9-12). They are illumined by his light and come to know God and his salvation (Matt 4:16; Luke 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18). They are “children of the light” (John 12:36; 1 Thes 5:5), their allegiance is to the light (1 Jn 1:7), and their conduct is characterized by light—by “what is good and right and true” (Eph 5:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-5, 14-18; 15:12; Exod 10:21-23; 14:20; 20:21; 2 Sam 22:10-13; 1 Kgs 8:12; Job 3:3-7; 12:22-25; 15:22; 17:12-13; 34:22; Pss 18:11, 28; 27:1; 97:2-6; 139:11-12; Prov 2:13; 4:18-19; Eccl 11:7-8; Isa 5:20; 9:2; 29:15; 51:4; 60:2-3, 19-20; Dan 2:22; Mic 7:8-9; Matt 4:16; 6:22-23; 8:12; Luke 1:78-79; 2:32; John 1:4-9; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-36, 46; Acts 13:47; 26:18; Rom 2:19-20; Eph 5:7-14; 1 Thes 5:5-8; 1 Tim 6:16; Jas 1:17; 2 Pet 2:17; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:7-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Darkness and Light<\/h3>\n<h5>Darkness<\/h5>\n<p>Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 <em>\/\/<\/em> 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sam 22:10 <em>\/\/<\/em> Ps 18:9). God is unknowable unless he reveals himself.<\/p>\n<p>Darkness often stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gen 15:12; Job 12:25; 19:8; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Isa 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>For Job, darkness was like nothingness (Job 3:4-6). It points to death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Job 10:21-22; 17:12-13; Eccl 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>Evil takes place under the cover of darkness (Job 24:16-17), but darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Ps 139:11-12; Isa 29:15-16). Darkness often depicts ignorance of God’s will: Knowledge of God is “light,” so lack of knowledge is “darkness” (Job 12:24-25; Matt 4:16; John 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11). Moral depravity is described as darkness (Prov 2:13; 4:19; Isa 5:20; 60:2). In the New Testament, darkness is also a metaphor for spiritual ignorance (Matt 4:16; 6:23; Luke 1:79; 11:35; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13). Those who come to know God come out of darkness (Isa 9:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of the Old Testament prophets was the Day of the Lord, which was often associated with darkness (Ezek 32:8; Joel 2:2, 31; Amos 5:18, 20; Zeph 1:15). The New Testament also links darkness with judgment (Matt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pet 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13).<\/p>\n<h5>Light<\/h5>\n<p>Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gen 1:3; see also 1:16). It is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting (Eccl 11:7; Jas 1:17). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led by a pillar of cloud and fire that gave them light (Exod 13:21; 14:20) and showed them the way to go (Neh 9:19). Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord (Job 12:22; 29:2-3; Pss 4:6; 18:28; 44:3; 118:27). God’s servants can extend this blessing by being a light to guide others (Isa 42:6; 49:6). God’s light also exposes sin and brings justice (see Ps 90:8; Isa 51:4).<\/p>\n<p>God himself is described as light (Ps 27:1; Isa 60:19-20; Dan 2:22; 1 Jn 1:5), and he dwells in unapproachable light (see 1 Tim 6:16). Yet he brings his servants into the light (Mic 7:8-9; see also 1 Jn 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). He brought a revelation (light) from God, but he was more than a revealer—he was himself that revelation (John 1:1-10). Those who receive Jesus, who believe in the Light, receive the right to become children of God (John 1:9-12). They are illumined by his light and come to know God and his salvation (Matt 4:16; Luke 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18). They are “children of the light” (John 12:36; 1 Thes 5:5), their allegiance is to the light (1 Jn 1:7), and their conduct is characterized by light—by “what is good and right and true” (Eph 5:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-5, 14-18; 15:12; Exod 10:21-23; 14:20; 20:21; 2 Sam 22:10-13; 1 Kgs 8:12; Job 3:3-7; 12:22-25; 15:22; 17:12-13; 34:22; Pss 18:11, 28; 27:1; 97:2-6; 139:11-12; Prov 2:13; 4:18-19; Eccl 11:7-8; Isa 5:20; 9:2; 29:15; 51:4; 60:2-3, 19-20; Dan 2:22; Mic 7:8-9; Matt 4:16; 6:22-23; 8:12; Luke 1:78-79; 2:32; John 1:4-9; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-36, 46; Acts 13:47; 26:18; Rom 2:19-20; Eph 5:7-14; 1 Thes 5:5-8; 1 Tim 6:16; Jas 1:17; 2 Pet 2:17; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:7-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Darkness and Light Darkness Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23). There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 \/\/ 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sa...","summary_en":"Darkness and Light Darkness Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23). There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 \/\/ 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sa...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65800,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Word","title_en":"The Word","content_ro":"<h3>The Word<\/h3>\n<p>John raises the curtain on his Gospel with a stunning description of Jesus Christ as “the Word” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span><em>,<\/em> John 1:1). Both Greek and Jewish listeners in the first century would immediately recognize the profound meaning of this title. Greeks would have thought of the seminal forces that sustain the universe. Jewish minds would have thought back to God creating the world with his word (Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9). In Jesus’ day, the Word of God had taken on creative personal attributes. Jews viewed God’s Word as personifying divine Wisdom. Through Wisdom, God extended himself into the cosmos, creating the world (Prov 8:22-31).<\/p>\n<p>John makes it clear that Jesus shares the same essence as God; the Son existed before time, and he was the agent of all creation. John anchors the divinity of Jesus in this ancient Jewish concept of Wisdom. The divine Wisdom that has existed with God from before time can now be known in Jesus Christ. In perhaps the most striking verse penned by an apostle, John writes that this Logos, this Wisdom, became flesh and lived among us as a human (John 1:14). What God is, the Logos is, and the Logos is Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9; Prov 8:22-31; Isa 40:8; John 1:1-18; 1 Jn 1:1; Rev 19:13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Word<\/h3>\n<p>John raises the curtain on his Gospel with a stunning description of Jesus Christ as “the Word” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span><em>,<\/em> John 1:1). Both Greek and Jewish listeners in the first century would immediately recognize the profound meaning of this title. Greeks would have thought of the seminal forces that sustain the universe. Jewish minds would have thought back to God creating the world with his word (Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9). In Jesus’ day, the Word of God had taken on creative personal attributes. Jews viewed God’s Word as personifying divine Wisdom. Through Wisdom, God extended himself into the cosmos, creating the world (Prov 8:22-31).<\/p>\n<p>John makes it clear that Jesus shares the same essence as God; the Son existed before time, and he was the agent of all creation. John anchors the divinity of Jesus in this ancient Jewish concept of Wisdom. The divine Wisdom that has existed with God from before time can now be known in Jesus Christ. In perhaps the most striking verse penned by an apostle, John writes that this Logos, this Wisdom, became flesh and lived among us as a human (John 1:14). What God is, the Logos is, and the Logos is Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9; Prov 8:22-31; Isa 40:8; John 1:1-18; 1 Jn 1:1; Rev 19:13<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Word John raises the curtain on his Gospel with a stunning description of Jesus Christ as “the Word” (Greek logos, John 1:1). Both Greek and Jewish listeners in the first century would immediately recognize the profound meaning of this title. Greeks would have thought of the seminal forces that sustain the universe. Jewish minds would have thought back to God creating the world with his word (Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9). In Jesus’ day, the Word of God had taken on creative personal attributes...","summary_en":"The Word John raises the curtain on his Gospel with a stunning description of Jesus Christ as “the Word” (Greek logos, John 1:1). Both Greek and Jewish listeners in the first century would immediately recognize the profound meaning of this title. Greeks would have thought of the seminal forces that sustain the universe. Jewish minds would have thought back to God creating the world with his word (Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9). In Jesus’ day, the Word of God had taken on creative personal attributes...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66529,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Unknown God","title_en":"The Unknown God","content_ro":"<h3>The Unknown God<\/h3>\n<p>When Paul spoke to the Areopagus, the “high council of the city” of Athens (Acts 17:19), he was speaking to people who did not share his faith in the God of Abraham and Moses who had revealed himself “many times and in many ways to [his] ancestors through the prophets” (Heb 1:1). The members of his audience had a very different definition of the divine. A host of divinities inhabited their world, and the common people retained much of their belief in the ancient gods. But many of the cultural elite of Athens no longer believed in the gods in any literal sense. Instead, they held to either a form of materialism (the physical is everything) or pantheism (the divine inhabits everything).<\/p>\n<p>What they all shared in common was the absence of the idea that there is one true God who is Lord of all. Their myths told of the activities of various gods, but they did not have faith that the ultimate reality, God himself, could be known. Instead, they reasoned and discussed “the latest ideas,” hoping for a better understanding of the nature of things.<\/p>\n<p>There were a wide variety of philosophical ideas current in Athens when Paul visited, but two main schools of thought dominated, Stoicism and Epicureanism (Acts 17:18).<\/p>\n<p>Zeno of Citium (334~262 <span>BC<\/span>) founded Stoicism. Stoics studied nature’s laws and believed in the Logos, a pervasive organizing and sustaining force that gives all things their essential nature and so gives life and reason to humanity. The good life is one in which reason rules, and peace of mind and harmony with nature prevail. Many prominent statesmen were Stoics or influenced by Stoicism, including Cicero, Seneca, and Marcus Aurelius. Stoic ideas proved attractive to some Christians because of the similarities between the Stoic logos and the divine Logos (John 1:1-18), and between the idea of natural law and the law of God.<\/p>\n<p>Those who followed Epicurus (341–270 <span>BC<\/span>) were empiricists; they relied upon sense experience (as opposed to reason) for knowledge. Epicureans were concerned with natural evidence and were unenthusiastic about mathematics. Their focus was ethics, the study of right behavior; they judged the value of an action or thing in terms of the pleasure or pain it brought. Epicurus saw belief in gods (meddling and powerful beings who terrified ordinary mortals) as a serious threat to tranquility. For him and his followers, neither the gods nor death (which is the end) should be feared.<\/p>\n<p>When Paul spoke in that context, he used their own poets to proclaim things that they could barely comprehend: That the God who made everything is both personal and knowable; that he revealed himself clearly, historically, and definitively in Jesus Christ; that death is not followed by either the cessation of existence or the migration of the soul, but by judgment; and that the proof of all of this is the resurrection of Christ from the dead.<\/p>\n<p>What was foolishness to most of the Greeks of Athens turns out to be the ultimate truth: God is knowable, and can be known through Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ps 50:7-15; Isa 42:5-7; Acts 17:16-32; Rom 1:18-32; Col 1:15-23; 2:6-12; 1 Thes 1:9-10; Heb 1:1-4<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Unknown God<\/h3>\n<p>When Paul spoke to the Areopagus, the “high council of the city” of Athens (Acts 17:19), he was speaking to people who did not share his faith in the God of Abraham and Moses who had revealed himself “many times and in many ways to [his] ancestors through the prophets” (Heb 1:1). The members of his audience had a very different definition of the divine. A host of divinities inhabited their world, and the common people retained much of their belief in the ancient gods. But many of the cultural elite of Athens no longer believed in the gods in any literal sense. Instead, they held to either a form of materialism (the physical is everything) or pantheism (the divine inhabits everything).<\/p>\n<p>What they all shared in common was the absence of the idea that there is one true God who is Lord of all. Their myths told of the activities of various gods, but they did not have faith that the ultimate reality, God himself, could be known. Instead, they reasoned and discussed “the latest ideas,” hoping for a better understanding of the nature of things.<\/p>\n<p>There were a wide variety of philosophical ideas current in Athens when Paul visited, but two main schools of thought dominated, Stoicism and Epicureanism (Acts 17:18).<\/p>\n<p>Zeno of Citium (334~262 <span>BC<\/span>) founded Stoicism. Stoics studied nature’s laws and believed in the Logos, a pervasive organizing and sustaining force that gives all things their essential nature and so gives life and reason to humanity. The good life is one in which reason rules, and peace of mind and harmony with nature prevail. Many prominent statesmen were Stoics or influenced by Stoicism, including Cicero, Seneca, and Marcus Aurelius. Stoic ideas proved attractive to some Christians because of the similarities between the Stoic logos and the divine Logos (John 1:1-18), and between the idea of natural law and the law of God.<\/p>\n<p>Those who followed Epicurus (341–270 <span>BC<\/span>) were empiricists; they relied upon sense experience (as opposed to reason) for knowledge. Epicureans were concerned with natural evidence and were unenthusiastic about mathematics. Their focus was ethics, the study of right behavior; they judged the value of an action or thing in terms of the pleasure or pain it brought. Epicurus saw belief in gods (meddling and powerful beings who terrified ordinary mortals) as a serious threat to tranquility. For him and his followers, neither the gods nor death (which is the end) should be feared.<\/p>\n<p>When Paul spoke in that context, he used their own poets to proclaim things that they could barely comprehend: That the God who made everything is both personal and knowable; that he revealed himself clearly, historically, and definitively in Jesus Christ; that death is not followed by either the cessation of existence or the migration of the soul, but by judgment; and that the proof of all of this is the resurrection of Christ from the dead.<\/p>\n<p>What was foolishness to most of the Greeks of Athens turns out to be the ultimate truth: God is knowable, and can be known through Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ps 50:7-15; Isa 42:5-7; Acts 17:16-32; Rom 1:18-32; Col 1:15-23; 2:6-12; 1 Thes 1:9-10; Heb 1:1-4<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Unknown God When Paul spoke to the Areopagus, the “high council of the city” of Athens (Acts 17:19), he was speaking to people who did not share his faith in the God of Abraham and Moses who had revealed himself “many times and in many ways to [his] ancestors through the prophets” (Heb 1:1). The members of his audience had a very different definition of the divine. A host of divinities inhabited their world, and the common people retained much of their belief in the ancient gods. But many...","summary_en":"The Unknown God When Paul spoke to the Areopagus, the “high council of the city” of Athens (Acts 17:19), he was speaking to people who did not share his faith in the God of Abraham and Moses who had revealed himself “many times and in many ways to [his] ancestors through the prophets” (Heb 1:1). The members of his audience had a very different definition of the divine. A host of divinities inhabited their world, and the common people retained much of their belief in the ancient gods. But many...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":67394,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature","title_en":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature","content_ro":"<h3>The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature<\/h3>\n<p>Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he shares the nature of God himself. This claim was a major point of contention between Jesus and the religous leaders, who accused Jesus of blasphemy (John 5:16-18; 8:54-59; 10:30-39).<\/p>\n<p>The hymn also affirms that Jesus Christ came to earth in an act of immense humility—the infinite God became human (Phil 2:7; see Col 1:15; John 1:10-14; Heb 2:14, 17). Jesus Christ, the glorious Creator of the universe, died as a sacrificial offering for the sins of human beings so that we might be forgiven and be reconciled to God (Phil 2:8; see John 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Col 1:20, 22; 2:13-14; Heb 1:3; 10:9-14), as the Scriptures had foretold (see Isa 53:3-12).<\/p>\n<p>This hymn also affirms that God raised Jesus from the dead, has given him “the place of highest honor” in heaven (Phil 2:9), and conferred on him the title “Lord” (2:11; cp. Col 1:18). One day, all created beings will bow before him and acknowledge that he is Lord of the entire universe (Phil 2:9-11), deserving of the worship that God alone is worthy to receive (see Rev 5:8-14).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 53:3-12; John 1:1-2, 10-14; 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Phil 2:6-11; Col 1:15-22; 2:9, 13-14; Heb 1:1-3; 2:14, 17; 10:9-14; Rev 5:8-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature<\/h3>\n<p>Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he shares the nature of God himself. This claim was a major point of contention between Jesus and the religous leaders, who accused Jesus of blasphemy (John 5:16-18; 8:54-59; 10:30-39).<\/p>\n<p>The hymn also affirms that Jesus Christ came to earth in an act of immense humility—the infinite God became human (Phil 2:7; see Col 1:15; John 1:10-14; Heb 2:14, 17). Jesus Christ, the glorious Creator of the universe, died as a sacrificial offering for the sins of human beings so that we might be forgiven and be reconciled to God (Phil 2:8; see John 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Col 1:20, 22; 2:13-14; Heb 1:3; 10:9-14), as the Scriptures had foretold (see Isa 53:3-12).<\/p>\n<p>This hymn also affirms that God raised Jesus from the dead, has given him “the place of highest honor” in heaven (Phil 2:9), and conferred on him the title “Lord” (2:11; cp. Col 1:18). One day, all created beings will bow before him and acknowledge that he is Lord of the entire universe (Phil 2:9-11), deserving of the worship that God alone is worthy to receive (see Rev 5:8-14).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 53:3-12; John 1:1-2, 10-14; 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Phil 2:6-11; Col 1:15-22; 2:9, 13-14; Heb 1:1-3; 2:14, 17; 10:9-14; Rev 5:8-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he s...","summary_en":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he s...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":67670,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Word","title_en":"God’s Word","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Word<\/h3>\n<p>A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the universe and still governs it (Gen 1:3-28; Heb 1:3; 11:3).<\/p>\n<p>In the past, God’s word came primarily through angels or prophets, but now it has come preeminently in the person of Jesus, God’s Son (Heb 1:1-4; 2:3-4; cp. John 1:1-14). The word is to be heard, heeded, obeyed, and believed as a source of hope.<\/p>\n<p>Through his word, God initiates relationship with us and wants us to listen to him and respond in faith (see Gen 15:6; John 1:12). His word is authoritative and intentional, and it gives profound hope because God can be trusted to keep his promises (Heb 6:13-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-28; Deut 8:3; Pss 12:6; 19:8; 119:11, 89, 105; Isa 40:8; Jer 15:16; 23:29; 36:2; Matt 5:18; 7:24; John 1:1-14; 5:24; 2 Tim 3:16; Heb 1:1-4; 4:12; 6:13-20; 11:3; 1 Pet 1:25; 2 Pet 1:19-21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Word<\/h3>\n<p>A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the universe and still governs it (Gen 1:3-28; Heb 1:3; 11:3).<\/p>\n<p>In the past, God’s word came primarily through angels or prophets, but now it has come preeminently in the person of Jesus, God’s Son (Heb 1:1-4; 2:3-4; cp. John 1:1-14). The word is to be heard, heeded, obeyed, and believed as a source of hope.<\/p>\n<p>Through his word, God initiates relationship with us and wants us to listen to him and respond in faith (see Gen 15:6; John 1:12). His word is authoritative and intentional, and it gives profound hope because God can be trusted to keep his promises (Heb 6:13-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-28; Deut 8:3; Pss 12:6; 19:8; 119:11, 89, 105; Isa 40:8; Jer 15:16; 23:29; 36:2; Matt 5:18; 7:24; John 1:1-14; 5:24; 2 Tim 3:16; Heb 1:1-4; 4:12; 6:13-20; 11:3; 1 Pet 1:25; 2 Pet 1:19-21<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Word A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the ...","summary_en":"God’s Word A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":87295,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Creation","title_en":"The Creation","content_ro":"<h3>The Creation<\/h3>\n<p>The creation account is foundational to the message of the entire Bible. Understanding the early chapters of Genesis is thus crucial to forming a biblical worldview.<\/p>\n<p>These opening chapters deal with fundamental questions: Who created the world, and for what purpose? Why is the world in its present condition? Genesis answers these questions, dispelling the idolatry that Israel had acquired from their pagan masters in Egypt. In the Promised Land, the Israelites would again be surrounded by people who believed in false gods and worshiped created things rather than the Creator. Genesis taught Israel that the one true God created and has absolute authority over all things; he alone is worthy of worship.<\/p>\n<p>God transformed chaos into the present ordered cosmos. In the first three days, he transformed the formless void into the structured universe—the heavens, the water and sky, and the earth. In the second three days, he populated each realm. The seventh day, God’s day of rest, provides the weekly pattern for human activity and points forward to the rest that God promised to those who live by faith in him (see Heb 3:7–4:11).<\/p>\n<p>The creation account teaches that as God made the world, it was “very good” (Gen 1:31). In this environment, humans enjoyed unbroken fellowship with their Creator until their rebellion severed that fellowship and implanted evil in human hearts (see Gen 3–6). The world’s evil does not come from some defect in creation; rather, it stems from rebellion to God’s design and purposes.<\/p>\n<p>Since that first rebellion, humans have been alienated from the Creator and are prone to not recognize his presence and authority. This alienation results in shame, fractured relationships with God and other humans, estrangement from the rest of creation, and death (3:7-19). Since that time, God has been working purposefully in history to restore humans to fellowship with him, which he is doing through Jesus Christ. Restored humans are a new creation (see Gal 6:15); through Jesus, eternal life is open to all and God will one day renew all things (see Isa 65:17-25; Rom 8:19-22). The whole cosmos will be made new (Rev 21:1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:1–2:3; Ps 33:6-9; Prov 3:19; 8:22-31; Isa 40:26-28; 45:11-12, 18-19; Jer 10:11-16; John 1:1-4; Rom 8:18-25; 2 Cor 5:17; Col 1:15-20; Rev 4:11; 21:1-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Creation<\/h3>\n<p>The creation account is foundational to the message of the entire Bible. Understanding the early chapters of Genesis is thus crucial to forming a biblical worldview.<\/p>\n<p>These opening chapters deal with fundamental questions: Who created the world, and for what purpose? Why is the world in its present condition? Genesis answers these questions, dispelling the idolatry that Israel had acquired from their pagan masters in Egypt. In the Promised Land, the Israelites would again be surrounded by people who believed in false gods and worshiped created things rather than the Creator. Genesis taught Israel that the one true God created and has absolute authority over all things; he alone is worthy of worship.<\/p>\n<p>God transformed chaos into the present ordered cosmos. In the first three days, he transformed the formless void into the structured universe—the heavens, the water and sky, and the earth. In the second three days, he populated each realm. The seventh day, God’s day of rest, provides the weekly pattern for human activity and points forward to the rest that God promised to those who live by faith in him (see Heb 3:7–4:11).<\/p>\n<p>The creation account teaches that as God made the world, it was “very good” (Gen 1:31). In this environment, humans enjoyed unbroken fellowship with their Creator until their rebellion severed that fellowship and implanted evil in human hearts (see Gen 3–6). The world’s evil does not come from some defect in creation; rather, it stems from rebellion to God’s design and purposes.<\/p>\n<p>Since that first rebellion, humans have been alienated from the Creator and are prone to not recognize his presence and authority. This alienation results in shame, fractured relationships with God and other humans, estrangement from the rest of creation, and death (3:7-19). Since that time, God has been working purposefully in history to restore humans to fellowship with him, which he is doing through Jesus Christ. Restored humans are a new creation (see Gal 6:15); through Jesus, eternal life is open to all and God will one day renew all things (see Isa 65:17-25; Rom 8:19-22). The whole cosmos will be made new (Rev 21:1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:1–2:3; Ps 33:6-9; Prov 3:19; 8:22-31; Isa 40:26-28; 45:11-12, 18-19; Jer 10:11-16; John 1:1-4; Rom 8:18-25; 2 Cor 5:17; Col 1:15-20; Rev 4:11; 21:1-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Creation The creation account is foundational to the message of the entire Bible. Understanding the early chapters of Genesis is thus crucial to forming a biblical worldview. These opening chapters deal with fundamental questions: Who created the world, and for what purpose? Why is the world in its present condition? Genesis answers these questions, dispelling the idolatry that Israel had acquired from their pagan masters in Egypt. In the Promised Land, the Israelites would again be surro...","summary_en":"The Creation The creation account is foundational to the message of the entire Bible. Understanding the early chapters of Genesis is thus crucial to forming a biblical worldview. These opening chapters deal with fundamental questions: Who created the world, and for what purpose? Why is the world in its present condition? Genesis answers these questions, dispelling the idolatry that Israel had acquired from their pagan masters in Egypt. In the Promised Land, the Israelites would again be surro...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":90881,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Darkness and Light","title_en":"Darkness and Light","content_ro":"<h3>Darkness and Light<\/h3>\n<h5>Darkness<\/h5>\n<p>Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 <em>\/\/<\/em> 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sam 22:10 <em>\/\/<\/em> Ps 18:9). God is unknowable unless he reveals himself.<\/p>\n<p>Darkness often stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gen 15:12; Job 12:25; 19:8; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Isa 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>For Job, darkness was like nothingness (Job 3:4-6). It points to death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Job 10:21-22; 17:12-13; Eccl 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>Evil takes place under the cover of darkness (Job 24:16-17), but darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Ps 139:11-12; Isa 29:15-16). Darkness often depicts ignorance of God’s will: Knowledge of God is “light,” so lack of knowledge is “darkness” (Job 12:24-25; Matt 4:16; John 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11). Moral depravity is described as darkness (Prov 2:13; 4:19; Isa 5:20; 60:2). In the New Testament, darkness is also a metaphor for spiritual ignorance (Matt 4:16; 6:23; Luke 1:79; 11:35; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13). Those who come to know God come out of darkness (Isa 9:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of the Old Testament prophets was the Day of the Lord, which was often associated with darkness (Ezek 32:8; Joel 2:2, 31; Amos 5:18, 20; Zeph 1:15). The New Testament also links darkness with judgment (Matt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pet 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13).<\/p>\n<h5>Light<\/h5>\n<p>Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gen 1:3; see also 1:16). It is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting (Eccl 11:7; Jas 1:17). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led by a pillar of cloud and fire that gave them light (Exod 13:21; 14:20) and showed them the way to go (Neh 9:19). Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord (Job 12:22; 29:2-3; Pss 4:6; 18:28; 44:3; 118:27). God’s servants can extend this blessing by being a light to guide others (Isa 42:6; 49:6). God’s light also exposes sin and brings justice (see Ps 90:8; Isa 51:4).<\/p>\n<p>God himself is described as light (Ps 27:1; Isa 60:19-20; Dan 2:22; 1 Jn 1:5), and he dwells in unapproachable light (see 1 Tim 6:16). Yet he brings his servants into the light (Mic 7:8-9; see also 1 Jn 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). He brought a revelation (light) from God, but he was more than a revealer—he was himself that revelation (John 1:1-10). Those who receive Jesus, who believe in the Light, receive the right to become children of God (John 1:9-12). They are illumined by his light and come to know God and his salvation (Matt 4:16; Luke 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18). They are “children of the light” (John 12:36; 1 Thes 5:5), their allegiance is to the light (1 Jn 1:7), and their conduct is characterized by light—by “what is good and right and true” (Eph 5:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-5, 14-18; 15:12; Exod 10:21-23; 14:20; 20:21; 2 Sam 22:10-13; 1 Kgs 8:12; Job 3:3-7; 12:22-25; 15:22; 17:12-13; 34:22; Pss 18:11, 28; 27:1; 97:2-6; 139:11-12; Prov 2:13; 4:18-19; Eccl 11:7-8; Isa 5:20; 9:2; 29:15; 51:4; 60:2-3, 19-20; Dan 2:22; Mic 7:8-9; Matt 4:16; 6:22-23; 8:12; Luke 1:78-79; 2:32; John 1:4-9; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-36, 46; Acts 13:47; 26:18; Rom 2:19-20; Eph 5:7-14; 1 Thes 5:5-8; 1 Tim 6:16; Jas 1:17; 2 Pet 2:17; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:7-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Darkness and Light<\/h3>\n<h5>Darkness<\/h5>\n<p>Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 <em>\/\/<\/em> 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sam 22:10 <em>\/\/<\/em> Ps 18:9). God is unknowable unless he reveals himself.<\/p>\n<p>Darkness often stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gen 15:12; Job 12:25; 19:8; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Isa 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>For Job, darkness was like nothingness (Job 3:4-6). It points to death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Job 10:21-22; 17:12-13; Eccl 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>Evil takes place under the cover of darkness (Job 24:16-17), but darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Ps 139:11-12; Isa 29:15-16). Darkness often depicts ignorance of God’s will: Knowledge of God is “light,” so lack of knowledge is “darkness” (Job 12:24-25; Matt 4:16; John 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11). Moral depravity is described as darkness (Prov 2:13; 4:19; Isa 5:20; 60:2). In the New Testament, darkness is also a metaphor for spiritual ignorance (Matt 4:16; 6:23; Luke 1:79; 11:35; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13). Those who come to know God come out of darkness (Isa 9:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of the Old Testament prophets was the Day of the Lord, which was often associated with darkness (Ezek 32:8; Joel 2:2, 31; Amos 5:18, 20; Zeph 1:15). The New Testament also links darkness with judgment (Matt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pet 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13).<\/p>\n<h5>Light<\/h5>\n<p>Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gen 1:3; see also 1:16). It is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting (Eccl 11:7; Jas 1:17). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led by a pillar of cloud and fire that gave them light (Exod 13:21; 14:20) and showed them the way to go (Neh 9:19). Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord (Job 12:22; 29:2-3; Pss 4:6; 18:28; 44:3; 118:27). God’s servants can extend this blessing by being a light to guide others (Isa 42:6; 49:6). God’s light also exposes sin and brings justice (see Ps 90:8; Isa 51:4).<\/p>\n<p>God himself is described as light (Ps 27:1; Isa 60:19-20; Dan 2:22; 1 Jn 1:5), and he dwells in unapproachable light (see 1 Tim 6:16). Yet he brings his servants into the light (Mic 7:8-9; see also 1 Jn 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). He brought a revelation (light) from God, but he was more than a revealer—he was himself that revelation (John 1:1-10). Those who receive Jesus, who believe in the Light, receive the right to become children of God (John 1:9-12). They are illumined by his light and come to know God and his salvation (Matt 4:16; Luke 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18). They are “children of the light” (John 12:36; 1 Thes 5:5), their allegiance is to the light (1 Jn 1:7), and their conduct is characterized by light—by “what is good and right and true” (Eph 5:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-5, 14-18; 15:12; Exod 10:21-23; 14:20; 20:21; 2 Sam 22:10-13; 1 Kgs 8:12; Job 3:3-7; 12:22-25; 15:22; 17:12-13; 34:22; Pss 18:11, 28; 27:1; 97:2-6; 139:11-12; Prov 2:13; 4:18-19; Eccl 11:7-8; Isa 5:20; 9:2; 29:15; 51:4; 60:2-3, 19-20; Dan 2:22; Mic 7:8-9; Matt 4:16; 6:22-23; 8:12; Luke 1:78-79; 2:32; John 1:4-9; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-36, 46; Acts 13:47; 26:18; Rom 2:19-20; Eph 5:7-14; 1 Thes 5:5-8; 1 Tim 6:16; Jas 1:17; 2 Pet 2:17; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:7-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Darkness and Light Darkness Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23). There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 \/\/ 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sa...","summary_en":"Darkness and Light Darkness Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23). There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 \/\/ 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sa...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93426,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Word","title_en":"The Word","content_ro":"<h3>The Word<\/h3>\n<p>John raises the curtain on his Gospel with a stunning description of Jesus Christ as “the Word” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span><em>,<\/em> John 1:1). Both Greek and Jewish listeners in the first century would immediately recognize the profound meaning of this title. Greeks would have thought of the seminal forces that sustain the universe. Jewish minds would have thought back to God creating the world with his word (Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9). In Jesus’ day, the Word of God had taken on creative personal attributes. Jews viewed God’s Word as personifying divine Wisdom. Through Wisdom, God extended himself into the cosmos, creating the world (Prov 8:22-31).<\/p>\n<p>John makes it clear that Jesus shares the same essence as God; the Son existed before time, and he was the agent of all creation. John anchors the divinity of Jesus in this ancient Jewish concept of Wisdom. The divine Wisdom that has existed with God from before time can now be known in Jesus Christ. In perhaps the most striking verse penned by an apostle, John writes that this Logos, this Wisdom, became flesh and lived among us as a human (John 1:14). What God is, the Logos is, and the Logos is Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9; Prov 8:22-31; Isa 40:8; John 1:1-18; 1 Jn 1:1; Rev 19:13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Word<\/h3>\n<p>John raises the curtain on his Gospel with a stunning description of Jesus Christ as “the Word” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span><em>,<\/em> John 1:1). Both Greek and Jewish listeners in the first century would immediately recognize the profound meaning of this title. Greeks would have thought of the seminal forces that sustain the universe. Jewish minds would have thought back to God creating the world with his word (Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9). In Jesus’ day, the Word of God had taken on creative personal attributes. Jews viewed God’s Word as personifying divine Wisdom. Through Wisdom, God extended himself into the cosmos, creating the world (Prov 8:22-31).<\/p>\n<p>John makes it clear that Jesus shares the same essence as God; the Son existed before time, and he was the agent of all creation. John anchors the divinity of Jesus in this ancient Jewish concept of Wisdom. The divine Wisdom that has existed with God from before time can now be known in Jesus Christ. In perhaps the most striking verse penned by an apostle, John writes that this Logos, this Wisdom, became flesh and lived among us as a human (John 1:14). What God is, the Logos is, and the Logos is Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9; Prov 8:22-31; Isa 40:8; John 1:1-18; 1 Jn 1:1; Rev 19:13<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Word John raises the curtain on his Gospel with a stunning description of Jesus Christ as “the Word” (Greek logos, John 1:1). Both Greek and Jewish listeners in the first century would immediately recognize the profound meaning of this title. Greeks would have thought of the seminal forces that sustain the universe. Jewish minds would have thought back to God creating the world with his word (Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9). In Jesus’ day, the Word of God had taken on creative personal attributes...","summary_en":"The Word John raises the curtain on his Gospel with a stunning description of Jesus Christ as “the Word” (Greek logos, John 1:1). Both Greek and Jewish listeners in the first century would immediately recognize the profound meaning of this title. Greeks would have thought of the seminal forces that sustain the universe. Jewish minds would have thought back to God creating the world with his word (Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9). In Jesus’ day, the Word of God had taken on creative personal attributes...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":94155,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Unknown God","title_en":"The Unknown God","content_ro":"<h3>The Unknown God<\/h3>\n<p>When Paul spoke to the Areopagus, the “high council of the city” of Athens (Acts 17:19), he was speaking to people who did not share his faith in the God of Abraham and Moses who had revealed himself “many times and in many ways to [his] ancestors through the prophets” (Heb 1:1). The members of his audience had a very different definition of the divine. A host of divinities inhabited their world, and the common people retained much of their belief in the ancient gods. But many of the cultural elite of Athens no longer believed in the gods in any literal sense. Instead, they held to either a form of materialism (the physical is everything) or pantheism (the divine inhabits everything).<\/p>\n<p>What they all shared in common was the absence of the idea that there is one true God who is Lord of all. Their myths told of the activities of various gods, but they did not have faith that the ultimate reality, God himself, could be known. Instead, they reasoned and discussed “the latest ideas,” hoping for a better understanding of the nature of things.<\/p>\n<p>There were a wide variety of philosophical ideas current in Athens when Paul visited, but two main schools of thought dominated, Stoicism and Epicureanism (Acts 17:18).<\/p>\n<p>Zeno of Citium (334~262 <span>BC<\/span>) founded Stoicism. Stoics studied nature’s laws and believed in the Logos, a pervasive organizing and sustaining force that gives all things their essential nature and so gives life and reason to humanity. The good life is one in which reason rules, and peace of mind and harmony with nature prevail. Many prominent statesmen were Stoics or influenced by Stoicism, including Cicero, Seneca, and Marcus Aurelius. Stoic ideas proved attractive to some Christians because of the similarities between the Stoic logos and the divine Logos (John 1:1-18), and between the idea of natural law and the law of God.<\/p>\n<p>Those who followed Epicurus (341–270 <span>BC<\/span>) were empiricists; they relied upon sense experience (as opposed to reason) for knowledge. Epicureans were concerned with natural evidence and were unenthusiastic about mathematics. Their focus was ethics, the study of right behavior; they judged the value of an action or thing in terms of the pleasure or pain it brought. Epicurus saw belief in gods (meddling and powerful beings who terrified ordinary mortals) as a serious threat to tranquility. For him and his followers, neither the gods nor death (which is the end) should be feared.<\/p>\n<p>When Paul spoke in that context, he used their own poets to proclaim things that they could barely comprehend: That the God who made everything is both personal and knowable; that he revealed himself clearly, historically, and definitively in Jesus Christ; that death is not followed by either the cessation of existence or the migration of the soul, but by judgment; and that the proof of all of this is the resurrection of Christ from the dead.<\/p>\n<p>What was foolishness to most of the Greeks of Athens turns out to be the ultimate truth: God is knowable, and can be known through Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ps 50:7-15; Isa 42:5-7; Acts 17:16-32; Rom 1:18-32; Col 1:15-23; 2:6-12; 1 Thes 1:9-10; Heb 1:1-4<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Unknown God<\/h3>\n<p>When Paul spoke to the Areopagus, the “high council of the city” of Athens (Acts 17:19), he was speaking to people who did not share his faith in the God of Abraham and Moses who had revealed himself “many times and in many ways to [his] ancestors through the prophets” (Heb 1:1). The members of his audience had a very different definition of the divine. A host of divinities inhabited their world, and the common people retained much of their belief in the ancient gods. But many of the cultural elite of Athens no longer believed in the gods in any literal sense. Instead, they held to either a form of materialism (the physical is everything) or pantheism (the divine inhabits everything).<\/p>\n<p>What they all shared in common was the absence of the idea that there is one true God who is Lord of all. Their myths told of the activities of various gods, but they did not have faith that the ultimate reality, God himself, could be known. Instead, they reasoned and discussed “the latest ideas,” hoping for a better understanding of the nature of things.<\/p>\n<p>There were a wide variety of philosophical ideas current in Athens when Paul visited, but two main schools of thought dominated, Stoicism and Epicureanism (Acts 17:18).<\/p>\n<p>Zeno of Citium (334~262 <span>BC<\/span>) founded Stoicism. Stoics studied nature’s laws and believed in the Logos, a pervasive organizing and sustaining force that gives all things their essential nature and so gives life and reason to humanity. The good life is one in which reason rules, and peace of mind and harmony with nature prevail. Many prominent statesmen were Stoics or influenced by Stoicism, including Cicero, Seneca, and Marcus Aurelius. Stoic ideas proved attractive to some Christians because of the similarities between the Stoic logos and the divine Logos (John 1:1-18), and between the idea of natural law and the law of God.<\/p>\n<p>Those who followed Epicurus (341–270 <span>BC<\/span>) were empiricists; they relied upon sense experience (as opposed to reason) for knowledge. Epicureans were concerned with natural evidence and were unenthusiastic about mathematics. Their focus was ethics, the study of right behavior; they judged the value of an action or thing in terms of the pleasure or pain it brought. Epicurus saw belief in gods (meddling and powerful beings who terrified ordinary mortals) as a serious threat to tranquility. For him and his followers, neither the gods nor death (which is the end) should be feared.<\/p>\n<p>When Paul spoke in that context, he used their own poets to proclaim things that they could barely comprehend: That the God who made everything is both personal and knowable; that he revealed himself clearly, historically, and definitively in Jesus Christ; that death is not followed by either the cessation of existence or the migration of the soul, but by judgment; and that the proof of all of this is the resurrection of Christ from the dead.<\/p>\n<p>What was foolishness to most of the Greeks of Athens turns out to be the ultimate truth: God is knowable, and can be known through Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ps 50:7-15; Isa 42:5-7; Acts 17:16-32; Rom 1:18-32; Col 1:15-23; 2:6-12; 1 Thes 1:9-10; Heb 1:1-4<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Unknown God When Paul spoke to the Areopagus, the “high council of the city” of Athens (Acts 17:19), he was speaking to people who did not share his faith in the God of Abraham and Moses who had revealed himself “many times and in many ways to [his] ancestors through the prophets” (Heb 1:1). The members of his audience had a very different definition of the divine. A host of divinities inhabited their world, and the common people retained much of their belief in the ancient gods. But many...","summary_en":"The Unknown God When Paul spoke to the Areopagus, the “high council of the city” of Athens (Acts 17:19), he was speaking to people who did not share his faith in the God of Abraham and Moses who had revealed himself “many times and in many ways to [his] ancestors through the prophets” (Heb 1:1). The members of his audience had a very different definition of the divine. A host of divinities inhabited their world, and the common people retained much of their belief in the ancient gods. But many...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":95020,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature","title_en":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature","content_ro":"<h3>The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature<\/h3>\n<p>Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he shares the nature of God himself. This claim was a major point of contention between Jesus and the religous leaders, who accused Jesus of blasphemy (John 5:16-18; 8:54-59; 10:30-39).<\/p>\n<p>The hymn also affirms that Jesus Christ came to earth in an act of immense humility—the infinite God became human (Phil 2:7; see Col 1:15; John 1:10-14; Heb 2:14, 17). Jesus Christ, the glorious Creator of the universe, died as a sacrificial offering for the sins of human beings so that we might be forgiven and be reconciled to God (Phil 2:8; see John 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Col 1:20, 22; 2:13-14; Heb 1:3; 10:9-14), as the Scriptures had foretold (see Isa 53:3-12).<\/p>\n<p>This hymn also affirms that God raised Jesus from the dead, has given him “the place of highest honor” in heaven (Phil 2:9), and conferred on him the title “Lord” (2:11; cp. Col 1:18). One day, all created beings will bow before him and acknowledge that he is Lord of the entire universe (Phil 2:9-11), deserving of the worship that God alone is worthy to receive (see Rev 5:8-14).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 53:3-12; John 1:1-2, 10-14; 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Phil 2:6-11; Col 1:15-22; 2:9, 13-14; Heb 1:1-3; 2:14, 17; 10:9-14; Rev 5:8-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature<\/h3>\n<p>Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he shares the nature of God himself. This claim was a major point of contention between Jesus and the religous leaders, who accused Jesus of blasphemy (John 5:16-18; 8:54-59; 10:30-39).<\/p>\n<p>The hymn also affirms that Jesus Christ came to earth in an act of immense humility—the infinite God became human (Phil 2:7; see Col 1:15; John 1:10-14; Heb 2:14, 17). Jesus Christ, the glorious Creator of the universe, died as a sacrificial offering for the sins of human beings so that we might be forgiven and be reconciled to God (Phil 2:8; see John 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Col 1:20, 22; 2:13-14; Heb 1:3; 10:9-14), as the Scriptures had foretold (see Isa 53:3-12).<\/p>\n<p>This hymn also affirms that God raised Jesus from the dead, has given him “the place of highest honor” in heaven (Phil 2:9), and conferred on him the title “Lord” (2:11; cp. Col 1:18). One day, all created beings will bow before him and acknowledge that he is Lord of the entire universe (Phil 2:9-11), deserving of the worship that God alone is worthy to receive (see Rev 5:8-14).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 53:3-12; John 1:1-2, 10-14; 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Phil 2:6-11; Col 1:15-22; 2:9, 13-14; Heb 1:1-3; 2:14, 17; 10:9-14; Rev 5:8-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he s...","summary_en":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he s...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":95296,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Word","title_en":"God’s Word","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Word<\/h3>\n<p>A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the universe and still governs it (Gen 1:3-28; Heb 1:3; 11:3).<\/p>\n<p>In the past, God’s word came primarily through angels or prophets, but now it has come preeminently in the person of Jesus, God’s Son (Heb 1:1-4; 2:3-4; cp. John 1:1-14). The word is to be heard, heeded, obeyed, and believed as a source of hope.<\/p>\n<p>Through his word, God initiates relationship with us and wants us to listen to him and respond in faith (see Gen 15:6; John 1:12). His word is authoritative and intentional, and it gives profound hope because God can be trusted to keep his promises (Heb 6:13-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-28; Deut 8:3; Pss 12:6; 19:8; 119:11, 89, 105; Isa 40:8; Jer 15:16; 23:29; 36:2; Matt 5:18; 7:24; John 1:1-14; 5:24; 2 Tim 3:16; Heb 1:1-4; 4:12; 6:13-20; 11:3; 1 Pet 1:25; 2 Pet 1:19-21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Word<\/h3>\n<p>A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the universe and still governs it (Gen 1:3-28; Heb 1:3; 11:3).<\/p>\n<p>In the past, God’s word came primarily through angels or prophets, but now it has come preeminently in the person of Jesus, God’s Son (Heb 1:1-4; 2:3-4; cp. John 1:1-14). The word is to be heard, heeded, obeyed, and believed as a source of hope.<\/p>\n<p>Through his word, God initiates relationship with us and wants us to listen to him and respond in faith (see Gen 15:6; John 1:12). His word is authoritative and intentional, and it gives profound hope because God can be trusted to keep his promises (Heb 6:13-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-28; Deut 8:3; Pss 12:6; 19:8; 119:11, 89, 105; Isa 40:8; Jer 15:16; 23:29; 36:2; Matt 5:18; 7:24; John 1:1-14; 5:24; 2 Tim 3:16; Heb 1:1-4; 4:12; 6:13-20; 11:3; 1 Pet 1:25; 2 Pet 1:19-21<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Word A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the ...","summary_en":"God’s Word A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":114921,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Creation","title_en":"The Creation","content_ro":"<h3>The Creation<\/h3>\n<p>The creation account is foundational to the message of the entire Bible. Understanding the early chapters of Genesis is thus crucial to forming a biblical worldview.<\/p>\n<p>These opening chapters deal with fundamental questions: Who created the world, and for what purpose? Why is the world in its present condition? Genesis answers these questions, dispelling the idolatry that Israel had acquired from their pagan masters in Egypt. In the Promised Land, the Israelites would again be surrounded by people who believed in false gods and worshiped created things rather than the Creator. Genesis taught Israel that the one true God created and has absolute authority over all things; he alone is worthy of worship.<\/p>\n<p>God transformed chaos into the present ordered cosmos. In the first three days, he transformed the formless void into the structured universe—the heavens, the water and sky, and the earth. In the second three days, he populated each realm. The seventh day, God’s day of rest, provides the weekly pattern for human activity and points forward to the rest that God promised to those who live by faith in him (see Heb 3:7–4:11).<\/p>\n<p>The creation account teaches that as God made the world, it was “very good” (Gen 1:31). In this environment, humans enjoyed unbroken fellowship with their Creator until their rebellion severed that fellowship and implanted evil in human hearts (see Gen 3–6). The world’s evil does not come from some defect in creation; rather, it stems from rebellion to God’s design and purposes.<\/p>\n<p>Since that first rebellion, humans have been alienated from the Creator and are prone to not recognize his presence and authority. This alienation results in shame, fractured relationships with God and other humans, estrangement from the rest of creation, and death (3:7-19). Since that time, God has been working purposefully in history to restore humans to fellowship with him, which he is doing through Jesus Christ. Restored humans are a new creation (see Gal 6:15); through Jesus, eternal life is open to all and God will one day renew all things (see Isa 65:17-25; Rom 8:19-22). The whole cosmos will be made new (Rev 21:1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:1–2:3; Ps 33:6-9; Prov 3:19; 8:22-31; Isa 40:26-28; 45:11-12, 18-19; Jer 10:11-16; John 1:1-4; Rom 8:18-25; 2 Cor 5:17; Col 1:15-20; Rev 4:11; 21:1-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Creation<\/h3>\n<p>The creation account is foundational to the message of the entire Bible. Understanding the early chapters of Genesis is thus crucial to forming a biblical worldview.<\/p>\n<p>These opening chapters deal with fundamental questions: Who created the world, and for what purpose? Why is the world in its present condition? Genesis answers these questions, dispelling the idolatry that Israel had acquired from their pagan masters in Egypt. In the Promised Land, the Israelites would again be surrounded by people who believed in false gods and worshiped created things rather than the Creator. Genesis taught Israel that the one true God created and has absolute authority over all things; he alone is worthy of worship.<\/p>\n<p>God transformed chaos into the present ordered cosmos. In the first three days, he transformed the formless void into the structured universe—the heavens, the water and sky, and the earth. In the second three days, he populated each realm. The seventh day, God’s day of rest, provides the weekly pattern for human activity and points forward to the rest that God promised to those who live by faith in him (see Heb 3:7–4:11).<\/p>\n<p>The creation account teaches that as God made the world, it was “very good” (Gen 1:31). In this environment, humans enjoyed unbroken fellowship with their Creator until their rebellion severed that fellowship and implanted evil in human hearts (see Gen 3–6). The world’s evil does not come from some defect in creation; rather, it stems from rebellion to God’s design and purposes.<\/p>\n<p>Since that first rebellion, humans have been alienated from the Creator and are prone to not recognize his presence and authority. This alienation results in shame, fractured relationships with God and other humans, estrangement from the rest of creation, and death (3:7-19). Since that time, God has been working purposefully in history to restore humans to fellowship with him, which he is doing through Jesus Christ. Restored humans are a new creation (see Gal 6:15); through Jesus, eternal life is open to all and God will one day renew all things (see Isa 65:17-25; Rom 8:19-22). The whole cosmos will be made new (Rev 21:1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:1–2:3; Ps 33:6-9; Prov 3:19; 8:22-31; Isa 40:26-28; 45:11-12, 18-19; Jer 10:11-16; John 1:1-4; Rom 8:18-25; 2 Cor 5:17; Col 1:15-20; Rev 4:11; 21:1-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Creation The creation account is foundational to the message of the entire Bible. Understanding the early chapters of Genesis is thus crucial to forming a biblical worldview. These opening chapters deal with fundamental questions: Who created the world, and for what purpose? Why is the world in its present condition? Genesis answers these questions, dispelling the idolatry that Israel had acquired from their pagan masters in Egypt. In the Promised Land, the Israelites would again be surro...","summary_en":"The Creation The creation account is foundational to the message of the entire Bible. Understanding the early chapters of Genesis is thus crucial to forming a biblical worldview. These opening chapters deal with fundamental questions: Who created the world, and for what purpose? Why is the world in its present condition? Genesis answers these questions, dispelling the idolatry that Israel had acquired from their pagan masters in Egypt. In the Promised Land, the Israelites would again be surro...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":118507,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Darkness and Light","title_en":"Darkness and Light","content_ro":"<h3>Darkness and Light<\/h3>\n<h5>Darkness<\/h5>\n<p>Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 <em>\/\/<\/em> 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sam 22:10 <em>\/\/<\/em> Ps 18:9). God is unknowable unless he reveals himself.<\/p>\n<p>Darkness often stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gen 15:12; Job 12:25; 19:8; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Isa 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>For Job, darkness was like nothingness (Job 3:4-6). It points to death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Job 10:21-22; 17:12-13; Eccl 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>Evil takes place under the cover of darkness (Job 24:16-17), but darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Ps 139:11-12; Isa 29:15-16). Darkness often depicts ignorance of God’s will: Knowledge of God is “light,” so lack of knowledge is “darkness” (Job 12:24-25; Matt 4:16; John 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11). Moral depravity is described as darkness (Prov 2:13; 4:19; Isa 5:20; 60:2). In the New Testament, darkness is also a metaphor for spiritual ignorance (Matt 4:16; 6:23; Luke 1:79; 11:35; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13). Those who come to know God come out of darkness (Isa 9:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of the Old Testament prophets was the Day of the Lord, which was often associated with darkness (Ezek 32:8; Joel 2:2, 31; Amos 5:18, 20; Zeph 1:15). The New Testament also links darkness with judgment (Matt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pet 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13).<\/p>\n<h5>Light<\/h5>\n<p>Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gen 1:3; see also 1:16). It is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting (Eccl 11:7; Jas 1:17). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led by a pillar of cloud and fire that gave them light (Exod 13:21; 14:20) and showed them the way to go (Neh 9:19). Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord (Job 12:22; 29:2-3; Pss 4:6; 18:28; 44:3; 118:27). God’s servants can extend this blessing by being a light to guide others (Isa 42:6; 49:6). God’s light also exposes sin and brings justice (see Ps 90:8; Isa 51:4).<\/p>\n<p>God himself is described as light (Ps 27:1; Isa 60:19-20; Dan 2:22; 1 Jn 1:5), and he dwells in unapproachable light (see 1 Tim 6:16). Yet he brings his servants into the light (Mic 7:8-9; see also 1 Jn 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). He brought a revelation (light) from God, but he was more than a revealer—he was himself that revelation (John 1:1-10). Those who receive Jesus, who believe in the Light, receive the right to become children of God (John 1:9-12). They are illumined by his light and come to know God and his salvation (Matt 4:16; Luke 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18). They are “children of the light” (John 12:36; 1 Thes 5:5), their allegiance is to the light (1 Jn 1:7), and their conduct is characterized by light—by “what is good and right and true” (Eph 5:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-5, 14-18; 15:12; Exod 10:21-23; 14:20; 20:21; 2 Sam 22:10-13; 1 Kgs 8:12; Job 3:3-7; 12:22-25; 15:22; 17:12-13; 34:22; Pss 18:11, 28; 27:1; 97:2-6; 139:11-12; Prov 2:13; 4:18-19; Eccl 11:7-8; Isa 5:20; 9:2; 29:15; 51:4; 60:2-3, 19-20; Dan 2:22; Mic 7:8-9; Matt 4:16; 6:22-23; 8:12; Luke 1:78-79; 2:32; John 1:4-9; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-36, 46; Acts 13:47; 26:18; Rom 2:19-20; Eph 5:7-14; 1 Thes 5:5-8; 1 Tim 6:16; Jas 1:17; 2 Pet 2:17; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:7-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Darkness and Light<\/h3>\n<h5>Darkness<\/h5>\n<p>Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 <em>\/\/<\/em> 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sam 22:10 <em>\/\/<\/em> Ps 18:9). God is unknowable unless he reveals himself.<\/p>\n<p>Darkness often stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gen 15:12; Job 12:25; 19:8; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Isa 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>For Job, darkness was like nothingness (Job 3:4-6). It points to death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Job 10:21-22; 17:12-13; Eccl 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>Evil takes place under the cover of darkness (Job 24:16-17), but darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Ps 139:11-12; Isa 29:15-16). Darkness often depicts ignorance of God’s will: Knowledge of God is “light,” so lack of knowledge is “darkness” (Job 12:24-25; Matt 4:16; John 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11). Moral depravity is described as darkness (Prov 2:13; 4:19; Isa 5:20; 60:2). In the New Testament, darkness is also a metaphor for spiritual ignorance (Matt 4:16; 6:23; Luke 1:79; 11:35; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13). Those who come to know God come out of darkness (Isa 9:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of the Old Testament prophets was the Day of the Lord, which was often associated with darkness (Ezek 32:8; Joel 2:2, 31; Amos 5:18, 20; Zeph 1:15). The New Testament also links darkness with judgment (Matt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pet 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13).<\/p>\n<h5>Light<\/h5>\n<p>Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gen 1:3; see also 1:16). It is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting (Eccl 11:7; Jas 1:17). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led by a pillar of cloud and fire that gave them light (Exod 13:21; 14:20) and showed them the way to go (Neh 9:19). Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord (Job 12:22; 29:2-3; Pss 4:6; 18:28; 44:3; 118:27). God’s servants can extend this blessing by being a light to guide others (Isa 42:6; 49:6). God’s light also exposes sin and brings justice (see Ps 90:8; Isa 51:4).<\/p>\n<p>God himself is described as light (Ps 27:1; Isa 60:19-20; Dan 2:22; 1 Jn 1:5), and he dwells in unapproachable light (see 1 Tim 6:16). Yet he brings his servants into the light (Mic 7:8-9; see also 1 Jn 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). He brought a revelation (light) from God, but he was more than a revealer—he was himself that revelation (John 1:1-10). Those who receive Jesus, who believe in the Light, receive the right to become children of God (John 1:9-12). They are illumined by his light and come to know God and his salvation (Matt 4:16; Luke 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18). They are “children of the light” (John 12:36; 1 Thes 5:5), their allegiance is to the light (1 Jn 1:7), and their conduct is characterized by light—by “what is good and right and true” (Eph 5:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-5, 14-18; 15:12; Exod 10:21-23; 14:20; 20:21; 2 Sam 22:10-13; 1 Kgs 8:12; Job 3:3-7; 12:22-25; 15:22; 17:12-13; 34:22; Pss 18:11, 28; 27:1; 97:2-6; 139:11-12; Prov 2:13; 4:18-19; Eccl 11:7-8; Isa 5:20; 9:2; 29:15; 51:4; 60:2-3, 19-20; Dan 2:22; Mic 7:8-9; Matt 4:16; 6:22-23; 8:12; Luke 1:78-79; 2:32; John 1:4-9; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-36, 46; Acts 13:47; 26:18; Rom 2:19-20; Eph 5:7-14; 1 Thes 5:5-8; 1 Tim 6:16; Jas 1:17; 2 Pet 2:17; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:7-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Darkness and Light Darkness Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23). There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 \/\/ 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sa...","summary_en":"Darkness and Light Darkness Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23). There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 \/\/ 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sa...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121052,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Word","title_en":"The Word","content_ro":"<h3>The Word<\/h3>\n<p>John raises the curtain on his Gospel with a stunning description of Jesus Christ as “the Word” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span><em>,<\/em> John 1:1). Both Greek and Jewish listeners in the first century would immediately recognize the profound meaning of this title. Greeks would have thought of the seminal forces that sustain the universe. Jewish minds would have thought back to God creating the world with his word (Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9). In Jesus’ day, the Word of God had taken on creative personal attributes. Jews viewed God’s Word as personifying divine Wisdom. Through Wisdom, God extended himself into the cosmos, creating the world (Prov 8:22-31).<\/p>\n<p>John makes it clear that Jesus shares the same essence as God; the Son existed before time, and he was the agent of all creation. John anchors the divinity of Jesus in this ancient Jewish concept of Wisdom. The divine Wisdom that has existed with God from before time can now be known in Jesus Christ. In perhaps the most striking verse penned by an apostle, John writes that this Logos, this Wisdom, became flesh and lived among us as a human (John 1:14). What God is, the Logos is, and the Logos is Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9; Prov 8:22-31; Isa 40:8; John 1:1-18; 1 Jn 1:1; Rev 19:13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Word<\/h3>\n<p>John raises the curtain on his Gospel with a stunning description of Jesus Christ as “the Word” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span><em>,<\/em> John 1:1). Both Greek and Jewish listeners in the first century would immediately recognize the profound meaning of this title. Greeks would have thought of the seminal forces that sustain the universe. Jewish minds would have thought back to God creating the world with his word (Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9). In Jesus’ day, the Word of God had taken on creative personal attributes. Jews viewed God’s Word as personifying divine Wisdom. Through Wisdom, God extended himself into the cosmos, creating the world (Prov 8:22-31).<\/p>\n<p>John makes it clear that Jesus shares the same essence as God; the Son existed before time, and he was the agent of all creation. John anchors the divinity of Jesus in this ancient Jewish concept of Wisdom. The divine Wisdom that has existed with God from before time can now be known in Jesus Christ. In perhaps the most striking verse penned by an apostle, John writes that this Logos, this Wisdom, became flesh and lived among us as a human (John 1:14). What God is, the Logos is, and the Logos is Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9; Prov 8:22-31; Isa 40:8; John 1:1-18; 1 Jn 1:1; Rev 19:13<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Word John raises the curtain on his Gospel with a stunning description of Jesus Christ as “the Word” (Greek logos, John 1:1). Both Greek and Jewish listeners in the first century would immediately recognize the profound meaning of this title. Greeks would have thought of the seminal forces that sustain the universe. Jewish minds would have thought back to God creating the world with his word (Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9). In Jesus’ day, the Word of God had taken on creative personal attributes...","summary_en":"The Word John raises the curtain on his Gospel with a stunning description of Jesus Christ as “the Word” (Greek logos, John 1:1). Both Greek and Jewish listeners in the first century would immediately recognize the profound meaning of this title. Greeks would have thought of the seminal forces that sustain the universe. Jewish minds would have thought back to God creating the world with his word (Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9). In Jesus’ day, the Word of God had taken on creative personal attributes...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121781,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Unknown God","title_en":"The Unknown God","content_ro":"<h3>The Unknown God<\/h3>\n<p>When Paul spoke to the Areopagus, the “high council of the city” of Athens (Acts 17:19), he was speaking to people who did not share his faith in the God of Abraham and Moses who had revealed himself “many times and in many ways to [his] ancestors through the prophets” (Heb 1:1). The members of his audience had a very different definition of the divine. A host of divinities inhabited their world, and the common people retained much of their belief in the ancient gods. But many of the cultural elite of Athens no longer believed in the gods in any literal sense. Instead, they held to either a form of materialism (the physical is everything) or pantheism (the divine inhabits everything).<\/p>\n<p>What they all shared in common was the absence of the idea that there is one true God who is Lord of all. Their myths told of the activities of various gods, but they did not have faith that the ultimate reality, God himself, could be known. Instead, they reasoned and discussed “the latest ideas,” hoping for a better understanding of the nature of things.<\/p>\n<p>There were a wide variety of philosophical ideas current in Athens when Paul visited, but two main schools of thought dominated, Stoicism and Epicureanism (Acts 17:18).<\/p>\n<p>Zeno of Citium (334~262 <span>BC<\/span>) founded Stoicism. Stoics studied nature’s laws and believed in the Logos, a pervasive organizing and sustaining force that gives all things their essential nature and so gives life and reason to humanity. The good life is one in which reason rules, and peace of mind and harmony with nature prevail. Many prominent statesmen were Stoics or influenced by Stoicism, including Cicero, Seneca, and Marcus Aurelius. Stoic ideas proved attractive to some Christians because of the similarities between the Stoic logos and the divine Logos (John 1:1-18), and between the idea of natural law and the law of God.<\/p>\n<p>Those who followed Epicurus (341–270 <span>BC<\/span>) were empiricists; they relied upon sense experience (as opposed to reason) for knowledge. Epicureans were concerned with natural evidence and were unenthusiastic about mathematics. Their focus was ethics, the study of right behavior; they judged the value of an action or thing in terms of the pleasure or pain it brought. Epicurus saw belief in gods (meddling and powerful beings who terrified ordinary mortals) as a serious threat to tranquility. For him and his followers, neither the gods nor death (which is the end) should be feared.<\/p>\n<p>When Paul spoke in that context, he used their own poets to proclaim things that they could barely comprehend: That the God who made everything is both personal and knowable; that he revealed himself clearly, historically, and definitively in Jesus Christ; that death is not followed by either the cessation of existence or the migration of the soul, but by judgment; and that the proof of all of this is the resurrection of Christ from the dead.<\/p>\n<p>What was foolishness to most of the Greeks of Athens turns out to be the ultimate truth: God is knowable, and can be known through Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ps 50:7-15; Isa 42:5-7; Acts 17:16-32; Rom 1:18-32; Col 1:15-23; 2:6-12; 1 Thes 1:9-10; Heb 1:1-4<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Unknown God<\/h3>\n<p>When Paul spoke to the Areopagus, the “high council of the city” of Athens (Acts 17:19), he was speaking to people who did not share his faith in the God of Abraham and Moses who had revealed himself “many times and in many ways to [his] ancestors through the prophets” (Heb 1:1). The members of his audience had a very different definition of the divine. A host of divinities inhabited their world, and the common people retained much of their belief in the ancient gods. But many of the cultural elite of Athens no longer believed in the gods in any literal sense. Instead, they held to either a form of materialism (the physical is everything) or pantheism (the divine inhabits everything).<\/p>\n<p>What they all shared in common was the absence of the idea that there is one true God who is Lord of all. Their myths told of the activities of various gods, but they did not have faith that the ultimate reality, God himself, could be known. Instead, they reasoned and discussed “the latest ideas,” hoping for a better understanding of the nature of things.<\/p>\n<p>There were a wide variety of philosophical ideas current in Athens when Paul visited, but two main schools of thought dominated, Stoicism and Epicureanism (Acts 17:18).<\/p>\n<p>Zeno of Citium (334~262 <span>BC<\/span>) founded Stoicism. Stoics studied nature’s laws and believed in the Logos, a pervasive organizing and sustaining force that gives all things their essential nature and so gives life and reason to humanity. The good life is one in which reason rules, and peace of mind and harmony with nature prevail. Many prominent statesmen were Stoics or influenced by Stoicism, including Cicero, Seneca, and Marcus Aurelius. Stoic ideas proved attractive to some Christians because of the similarities between the Stoic logos and the divine Logos (John 1:1-18), and between the idea of natural law and the law of God.<\/p>\n<p>Those who followed Epicurus (341–270 <span>BC<\/span>) were empiricists; they relied upon sense experience (as opposed to reason) for knowledge. Epicureans were concerned with natural evidence and were unenthusiastic about mathematics. Their focus was ethics, the study of right behavior; they judged the value of an action or thing in terms of the pleasure or pain it brought. Epicurus saw belief in gods (meddling and powerful beings who terrified ordinary mortals) as a serious threat to tranquility. For him and his followers, neither the gods nor death (which is the end) should be feared.<\/p>\n<p>When Paul spoke in that context, he used their own poets to proclaim things that they could barely comprehend: That the God who made everything is both personal and knowable; that he revealed himself clearly, historically, and definitively in Jesus Christ; that death is not followed by either the cessation of existence or the migration of the soul, but by judgment; and that the proof of all of this is the resurrection of Christ from the dead.<\/p>\n<p>What was foolishness to most of the Greeks of Athens turns out to be the ultimate truth: God is knowable, and can be known through Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ps 50:7-15; Isa 42:5-7; Acts 17:16-32; Rom 1:18-32; Col 1:15-23; 2:6-12; 1 Thes 1:9-10; Heb 1:1-4<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Unknown God When Paul spoke to the Areopagus, the “high council of the city” of Athens (Acts 17:19), he was speaking to people who did not share his faith in the God of Abraham and Moses who had revealed himself “many times and in many ways to [his] ancestors through the prophets” (Heb 1:1). The members of his audience had a very different definition of the divine. A host of divinities inhabited their world, and the common people retained much of their belief in the ancient gods. But many...","summary_en":"The Unknown God When Paul spoke to the Areopagus, the “high council of the city” of Athens (Acts 17:19), he was speaking to people who did not share his faith in the God of Abraham and Moses who had revealed himself “many times and in many ways to [his] ancestors through the prophets” (Heb 1:1). The members of his audience had a very different definition of the divine. A host of divinities inhabited their world, and the common people retained much of their belief in the ancient gods. But many...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":122646,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature","title_en":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature","content_ro":"<h3>The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature<\/h3>\n<p>Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he shares the nature of God himself. This claim was a major point of contention between Jesus and the religous leaders, who accused Jesus of blasphemy (John 5:16-18; 8:54-59; 10:30-39).<\/p>\n<p>The hymn also affirms that Jesus Christ came to earth in an act of immense humility—the infinite God became human (Phil 2:7; see Col 1:15; John 1:10-14; Heb 2:14, 17). Jesus Christ, the glorious Creator of the universe, died as a sacrificial offering for the sins of human beings so that we might be forgiven and be reconciled to God (Phil 2:8; see John 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Col 1:20, 22; 2:13-14; Heb 1:3; 10:9-14), as the Scriptures had foretold (see Isa 53:3-12).<\/p>\n<p>This hymn also affirms that God raised Jesus from the dead, has given him “the place of highest honor” in heaven (Phil 2:9), and conferred on him the title “Lord” (2:11; cp. Col 1:18). One day, all created beings will bow before him and acknowledge that he is Lord of the entire universe (Phil 2:9-11), deserving of the worship that God alone is worthy to receive (see Rev 5:8-14).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 53:3-12; John 1:1-2, 10-14; 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Phil 2:6-11; Col 1:15-22; 2:9, 13-14; Heb 1:1-3; 2:14, 17; 10:9-14; Rev 5:8-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature<\/h3>\n<p>Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he shares the nature of God himself. This claim was a major point of contention between Jesus and the religous leaders, who accused Jesus of blasphemy (John 5:16-18; 8:54-59; 10:30-39).<\/p>\n<p>The hymn also affirms that Jesus Christ came to earth in an act of immense humility—the infinite God became human (Phil 2:7; see Col 1:15; John 1:10-14; Heb 2:14, 17). Jesus Christ, the glorious Creator of the universe, died as a sacrificial offering for the sins of human beings so that we might be forgiven and be reconciled to God (Phil 2:8; see John 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Col 1:20, 22; 2:13-14; Heb 1:3; 10:9-14), as the Scriptures had foretold (see Isa 53:3-12).<\/p>\n<p>This hymn also affirms that God raised Jesus from the dead, has given him “the place of highest honor” in heaven (Phil 2:9), and conferred on him the title “Lord” (2:11; cp. Col 1:18). One day, all created beings will bow before him and acknowledge that he is Lord of the entire universe (Phil 2:9-11), deserving of the worship that God alone is worthy to receive (see Rev 5:8-14).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 53:3-12; John 1:1-2, 10-14; 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Phil 2:6-11; Col 1:15-22; 2:9, 13-14; Heb 1:1-3; 2:14, 17; 10:9-14; Rev 5:8-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he s...","summary_en":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he s...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":122922,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Word","title_en":"God’s Word","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Word<\/h3>\n<p>A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the universe and still governs it (Gen 1:3-28; Heb 1:3; 11:3).<\/p>\n<p>In the past, God’s word came primarily through angels or prophets, but now it has come preeminently in the person of Jesus, God’s Son (Heb 1:1-4; 2:3-4; cp. John 1:1-14). The word is to be heard, heeded, obeyed, and believed as a source of hope.<\/p>\n<p>Through his word, God initiates relationship with us and wants us to listen to him and respond in faith (see Gen 15:6; John 1:12). His word is authoritative and intentional, and it gives profound hope because God can be trusted to keep his promises (Heb 6:13-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-28; Deut 8:3; Pss 12:6; 19:8; 119:11, 89, 105; Isa 40:8; Jer 15:16; 23:29; 36:2; Matt 5:18; 7:24; John 1:1-14; 5:24; 2 Tim 3:16; Heb 1:1-4; 4:12; 6:13-20; 11:3; 1 Pet 1:25; 2 Pet 1:19-21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Word<\/h3>\n<p>A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the universe and still governs it (Gen 1:3-28; Heb 1:3; 11:3).<\/p>\n<p>In the past, God’s word came primarily through angels or prophets, but now it has come preeminently in the person of Jesus, God’s Son (Heb 1:1-4; 2:3-4; cp. John 1:1-14). The word is to be heard, heeded, obeyed, and believed as a source of hope.<\/p>\n<p>Through his word, God initiates relationship with us and wants us to listen to him and respond in faith (see Gen 15:6; John 1:12). His word is authoritative and intentional, and it gives profound hope because God can be trusted to keep his promises (Heb 6:13-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-28; Deut 8:3; Pss 12:6; 19:8; 119:11, 89, 105; Isa 40:8; Jer 15:16; 23:29; 36:2; Matt 5:18; 7:24; John 1:1-14; 5:24; 2 Tim 3:16; Heb 1:1-4; 4:12; 6:13-20; 11:3; 1 Pet 1:25; 2 Pet 1:19-21<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Word A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the ...","summary_en":"God’s Word A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":142547,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Creation","title_en":"The Creation","content_ro":"<h3>The Creation<\/h3>\n<p>The creation account is foundational to the message of the entire Bible. Understanding the early chapters of Genesis is thus crucial to forming a biblical worldview.<\/p>\n<p>These opening chapters deal with fundamental questions: Who created the world, and for what purpose? Why is the world in its present condition? Genesis answers these questions, dispelling the idolatry that Israel had acquired from their pagan masters in Egypt. In the Promised Land, the Israelites would again be surrounded by people who believed in false gods and worshiped created things rather than the Creator. Genesis taught Israel that the one true God created and has absolute authority over all things; he alone is worthy of worship.<\/p>\n<p>God transformed chaos into the present ordered cosmos. In the first three days, he transformed the formless void into the structured universe—the heavens, the water and sky, and the earth. In the second three days, he populated each realm. The seventh day, God’s day of rest, provides the weekly pattern for human activity and points forward to the rest that God promised to those who live by faith in him (see Heb 3:7–4:11).<\/p>\n<p>The creation account teaches that as God made the world, it was “very good” (Gen 1:31). In this environment, humans enjoyed unbroken fellowship with their Creator until their rebellion severed that fellowship and implanted evil in human hearts (see Gen 3–6). The world’s evil does not come from some defect in creation; rather, it stems from rebellion to God’s design and purposes.<\/p>\n<p>Since that first rebellion, humans have been alienated from the Creator and are prone to not recognize his presence and authority. This alienation results in shame, fractured relationships with God and other humans, estrangement from the rest of creation, and death (3:7-19). Since that time, God has been working purposefully in history to restore humans to fellowship with him, which he is doing through Jesus Christ. Restored humans are a new creation (see Gal 6:15); through Jesus, eternal life is open to all and God will one day renew all things (see Isa 65:17-25; Rom 8:19-22). The whole cosmos will be made new (Rev 21:1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:1–2:3; Ps 33:6-9; Prov 3:19; 8:22-31; Isa 40:26-28; 45:11-12, 18-19; Jer 10:11-16; John 1:1-4; Rom 8:18-25; 2 Cor 5:17; Col 1:15-20; Rev 4:11; 21:1-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Creation<\/h3>\n<p>The creation account is foundational to the message of the entire Bible. Understanding the early chapters of Genesis is thus crucial to forming a biblical worldview.<\/p>\n<p>These opening chapters deal with fundamental questions: Who created the world, and for what purpose? Why is the world in its present condition? Genesis answers these questions, dispelling the idolatry that Israel had acquired from their pagan masters in Egypt. In the Promised Land, the Israelites would again be surrounded by people who believed in false gods and worshiped created things rather than the Creator. Genesis taught Israel that the one true God created and has absolute authority over all things; he alone is worthy of worship.<\/p>\n<p>God transformed chaos into the present ordered cosmos. In the first three days, he transformed the formless void into the structured universe—the heavens, the water and sky, and the earth. In the second three days, he populated each realm. The seventh day, God’s day of rest, provides the weekly pattern for human activity and points forward to the rest that God promised to those who live by faith in him (see Heb 3:7–4:11).<\/p>\n<p>The creation account teaches that as God made the world, it was “very good” (Gen 1:31). In this environment, humans enjoyed unbroken fellowship with their Creator until their rebellion severed that fellowship and implanted evil in human hearts (see Gen 3–6). The world’s evil does not come from some defect in creation; rather, it stems from rebellion to God’s design and purposes.<\/p>\n<p>Since that first rebellion, humans have been alienated from the Creator and are prone to not recognize his presence and authority. This alienation results in shame, fractured relationships with God and other humans, estrangement from the rest of creation, and death (3:7-19). Since that time, God has been working purposefully in history to restore humans to fellowship with him, which he is doing through Jesus Christ. Restored humans are a new creation (see Gal 6:15); through Jesus, eternal life is open to all and God will one day renew all things (see Isa 65:17-25; Rom 8:19-22). The whole cosmos will be made new (Rev 21:1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:1–2:3; Ps 33:6-9; Prov 3:19; 8:22-31; Isa 40:26-28; 45:11-12, 18-19; Jer 10:11-16; John 1:1-4; Rom 8:18-25; 2 Cor 5:17; Col 1:15-20; Rev 4:11; 21:1-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Creation The creation account is foundational to the message of the entire Bible. Understanding the early chapters of Genesis is thus crucial to forming a biblical worldview. These opening chapters deal with fundamental questions: Who created the world, and for what purpose? Why is the world in its present condition? Genesis answers these questions, dispelling the idolatry that Israel had acquired from their pagan masters in Egypt. In the Promised Land, the Israelites would again be surro...","summary_en":"The Creation The creation account is foundational to the message of the entire Bible. Understanding the early chapters of Genesis is thus crucial to forming a biblical worldview. These opening chapters deal with fundamental questions: Who created the world, and for what purpose? Why is the world in its present condition? Genesis answers these questions, dispelling the idolatry that Israel had acquired from their pagan masters in Egypt. In the Promised Land, the Israelites would again be surro...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":146133,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Darkness and Light","title_en":"Darkness and Light","content_ro":"<h3>Darkness and Light<\/h3>\n<h5>Darkness<\/h5>\n<p>Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 <em>\/\/<\/em> 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sam 22:10 <em>\/\/<\/em> Ps 18:9). God is unknowable unless he reveals himself.<\/p>\n<p>Darkness often stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gen 15:12; Job 12:25; 19:8; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Isa 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>For Job, darkness was like nothingness (Job 3:4-6). It points to death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Job 10:21-22; 17:12-13; Eccl 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>Evil takes place under the cover of darkness (Job 24:16-17), but darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Ps 139:11-12; Isa 29:15-16). Darkness often depicts ignorance of God’s will: Knowledge of God is “light,” so lack of knowledge is “darkness” (Job 12:24-25; Matt 4:16; John 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11). Moral depravity is described as darkness (Prov 2:13; 4:19; Isa 5:20; 60:2). In the New Testament, darkness is also a metaphor for spiritual ignorance (Matt 4:16; 6:23; Luke 1:79; 11:35; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13). Those who come to know God come out of darkness (Isa 9:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of the Old Testament prophets was the Day of the Lord, which was often associated with darkness (Ezek 32:8; Joel 2:2, 31; Amos 5:18, 20; Zeph 1:15). The New Testament also links darkness with judgment (Matt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pet 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13).<\/p>\n<h5>Light<\/h5>\n<p>Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gen 1:3; see also 1:16). It is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting (Eccl 11:7; Jas 1:17). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led by a pillar of cloud and fire that gave them light (Exod 13:21; 14:20) and showed them the way to go (Neh 9:19). Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord (Job 12:22; 29:2-3; Pss 4:6; 18:28; 44:3; 118:27). God’s servants can extend this blessing by being a light to guide others (Isa 42:6; 49:6). God’s light also exposes sin and brings justice (see Ps 90:8; Isa 51:4).<\/p>\n<p>God himself is described as light (Ps 27:1; Isa 60:19-20; Dan 2:22; 1 Jn 1:5), and he dwells in unapproachable light (see 1 Tim 6:16). Yet he brings his servants into the light (Mic 7:8-9; see also 1 Jn 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). He brought a revelation (light) from God, but he was more than a revealer—he was himself that revelation (John 1:1-10). Those who receive Jesus, who believe in the Light, receive the right to become children of God (John 1:9-12). They are illumined by his light and come to know God and his salvation (Matt 4:16; Luke 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18). They are “children of the light” (John 12:36; 1 Thes 5:5), their allegiance is to the light (1 Jn 1:7), and their conduct is characterized by light—by “what is good and right and true” (Eph 5:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-5, 14-18; 15:12; Exod 10:21-23; 14:20; 20:21; 2 Sam 22:10-13; 1 Kgs 8:12; Job 3:3-7; 12:22-25; 15:22; 17:12-13; 34:22; Pss 18:11, 28; 27:1; 97:2-6; 139:11-12; Prov 2:13; 4:18-19; Eccl 11:7-8; Isa 5:20; 9:2; 29:15; 51:4; 60:2-3, 19-20; Dan 2:22; Mic 7:8-9; Matt 4:16; 6:22-23; 8:12; Luke 1:78-79; 2:32; John 1:4-9; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-36, 46; Acts 13:47; 26:18; Rom 2:19-20; Eph 5:7-14; 1 Thes 5:5-8; 1 Tim 6:16; Jas 1:17; 2 Pet 2:17; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:7-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Darkness and Light<\/h3>\n<h5>Darkness<\/h5>\n<p>Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 <em>\/\/<\/em> 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sam 22:10 <em>\/\/<\/em> Ps 18:9). God is unknowable unless he reveals himself.<\/p>\n<p>Darkness often stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gen 15:12; Job 12:25; 19:8; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Isa 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>For Job, darkness was like nothingness (Job 3:4-6). It points to death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Job 10:21-22; 17:12-13; Eccl 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>Evil takes place under the cover of darkness (Job 24:16-17), but darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Ps 139:11-12; Isa 29:15-16). Darkness often depicts ignorance of God’s will: Knowledge of God is “light,” so lack of knowledge is “darkness” (Job 12:24-25; Matt 4:16; John 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11). Moral depravity is described as darkness (Prov 2:13; 4:19; Isa 5:20; 60:2). In the New Testament, darkness is also a metaphor for spiritual ignorance (Matt 4:16; 6:23; Luke 1:79; 11:35; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13). Those who come to know God come out of darkness (Isa 9:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of the Old Testament prophets was the Day of the Lord, which was often associated with darkness (Ezek 32:8; Joel 2:2, 31; Amos 5:18, 20; Zeph 1:15). The New Testament also links darkness with judgment (Matt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pet 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13).<\/p>\n<h5>Light<\/h5>\n<p>Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gen 1:3; see also 1:16). It is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting (Eccl 11:7; Jas 1:17). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led by a pillar of cloud and fire that gave them light (Exod 13:21; 14:20) and showed them the way to go (Neh 9:19). Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord (Job 12:22; 29:2-3; Pss 4:6; 18:28; 44:3; 118:27). God’s servants can extend this blessing by being a light to guide others (Isa 42:6; 49:6). God’s light also exposes sin and brings justice (see Ps 90:8; Isa 51:4).<\/p>\n<p>God himself is described as light (Ps 27:1; Isa 60:19-20; Dan 2:22; 1 Jn 1:5), and he dwells in unapproachable light (see 1 Tim 6:16). Yet he brings his servants into the light (Mic 7:8-9; see also 1 Jn 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). He brought a revelation (light) from God, but he was more than a revealer—he was himself that revelation (John 1:1-10). Those who receive Jesus, who believe in the Light, receive the right to become children of God (John 1:9-12). They are illumined by his light and come to know God and his salvation (Matt 4:16; Luke 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18). They are “children of the light” (John 12:36; 1 Thes 5:5), their allegiance is to the light (1 Jn 1:7), and their conduct is characterized by light—by “what is good and right and true” (Eph 5:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-5, 14-18; 15:12; Exod 10:21-23; 14:20; 20:21; 2 Sam 22:10-13; 1 Kgs 8:12; Job 3:3-7; 12:22-25; 15:22; 17:12-13; 34:22; Pss 18:11, 28; 27:1; 97:2-6; 139:11-12; Prov 2:13; 4:18-19; Eccl 11:7-8; Isa 5:20; 9:2; 29:15; 51:4; 60:2-3, 19-20; Dan 2:22; Mic 7:8-9; Matt 4:16; 6:22-23; 8:12; Luke 1:78-79; 2:32; John 1:4-9; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-36, 46; Acts 13:47; 26:18; Rom 2:19-20; Eph 5:7-14; 1 Thes 5:5-8; 1 Tim 6:16; Jas 1:17; 2 Pet 2:17; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:7-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Darkness and Light Darkness Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23). There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 \/\/ 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sa...","summary_en":"Darkness and Light Darkness Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23). There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 \/\/ 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sa...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148678,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Word","title_en":"The Word","content_ro":"<h3>The Word<\/h3>\n<p>John raises the curtain on his Gospel with a stunning description of Jesus Christ as “the Word” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span><em>,<\/em> John 1:1). Both Greek and Jewish listeners in the first century would immediately recognize the profound meaning of this title. Greeks would have thought of the seminal forces that sustain the universe. Jewish minds would have thought back to God creating the world with his word (Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9). In Jesus’ day, the Word of God had taken on creative personal attributes. Jews viewed God’s Word as personifying divine Wisdom. Through Wisdom, God extended himself into the cosmos, creating the world (Prov 8:22-31).<\/p>\n<p>John makes it clear that Jesus shares the same essence as God; the Son existed before time, and he was the agent of all creation. John anchors the divinity of Jesus in this ancient Jewish concept of Wisdom. The divine Wisdom that has existed with God from before time can now be known in Jesus Christ. In perhaps the most striking verse penned by an apostle, John writes that this Logos, this Wisdom, became flesh and lived among us as a human (John 1:14). What God is, the Logos is, and the Logos is Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9; Prov 8:22-31; Isa 40:8; John 1:1-18; 1 Jn 1:1; Rev 19:13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Word<\/h3>\n<p>John raises the curtain on his Gospel with a stunning description of Jesus Christ as “the Word” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span><em>,<\/em> John 1:1). Both Greek and Jewish listeners in the first century would immediately recognize the profound meaning of this title. Greeks would have thought of the seminal forces that sustain the universe. Jewish minds would have thought back to God creating the world with his word (Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9). In Jesus’ day, the Word of God had taken on creative personal attributes. Jews viewed God’s Word as personifying divine Wisdom. Through Wisdom, God extended himself into the cosmos, creating the world (Prov 8:22-31).<\/p>\n<p>John makes it clear that Jesus shares the same essence as God; the Son existed before time, and he was the agent of all creation. John anchors the divinity of Jesus in this ancient Jewish concept of Wisdom. The divine Wisdom that has existed with God from before time can now be known in Jesus Christ. In perhaps the most striking verse penned by an apostle, John writes that this Logos, this Wisdom, became flesh and lived among us as a human (John 1:14). What God is, the Logos is, and the Logos is Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9; Prov 8:22-31; Isa 40:8; John 1:1-18; 1 Jn 1:1; Rev 19:13<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Word John raises the curtain on his Gospel with a stunning description of Jesus Christ as “the Word” (Greek logos, John 1:1). Both Greek and Jewish listeners in the first century would immediately recognize the profound meaning of this title. Greeks would have thought of the seminal forces that sustain the universe. Jewish minds would have thought back to God creating the world with his word (Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9). In Jesus’ day, the Word of God had taken on creative personal attributes...","summary_en":"The Word John raises the curtain on his Gospel with a stunning description of Jesus Christ as “the Word” (Greek logos, John 1:1). Both Greek and Jewish listeners in the first century would immediately recognize the profound meaning of this title. Greeks would have thought of the seminal forces that sustain the universe. Jewish minds would have thought back to God creating the world with his word (Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9). In Jesus’ day, the Word of God had taken on creative personal attributes...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":149407,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Unknown God","title_en":"The Unknown God","content_ro":"<h3>The Unknown God<\/h3>\n<p>When Paul spoke to the Areopagus, the “high council of the city” of Athens (Acts 17:19), he was speaking to people who did not share his faith in the God of Abraham and Moses who had revealed himself “many times and in many ways to [his] ancestors through the prophets” (Heb 1:1). The members of his audience had a very different definition of the divine. A host of divinities inhabited their world, and the common people retained much of their belief in the ancient gods. But many of the cultural elite of Athens no longer believed in the gods in any literal sense. Instead, they held to either a form of materialism (the physical is everything) or pantheism (the divine inhabits everything).<\/p>\n<p>What they all shared in common was the absence of the idea that there is one true God who is Lord of all. Their myths told of the activities of various gods, but they did not have faith that the ultimate reality, God himself, could be known. Instead, they reasoned and discussed “the latest ideas,” hoping for a better understanding of the nature of things.<\/p>\n<p>There were a wide variety of philosophical ideas current in Athens when Paul visited, but two main schools of thought dominated, Stoicism and Epicureanism (Acts 17:18).<\/p>\n<p>Zeno of Citium (334~262 <span>BC<\/span>) founded Stoicism. Stoics studied nature’s laws and believed in the Logos, a pervasive organizing and sustaining force that gives all things their essential nature and so gives life and reason to humanity. The good life is one in which reason rules, and peace of mind and harmony with nature prevail. Many prominent statesmen were Stoics or influenced by Stoicism, including Cicero, Seneca, and Marcus Aurelius. Stoic ideas proved attractive to some Christians because of the similarities between the Stoic logos and the divine Logos (John 1:1-18), and between the idea of natural law and the law of God.<\/p>\n<p>Those who followed Epicurus (341–270 <span>BC<\/span>) were empiricists; they relied upon sense experience (as opposed to reason) for knowledge. Epicureans were concerned with natural evidence and were unenthusiastic about mathematics. Their focus was ethics, the study of right behavior; they judged the value of an action or thing in terms of the pleasure or pain it brought. Epicurus saw belief in gods (meddling and powerful beings who terrified ordinary mortals) as a serious threat to tranquility. For him and his followers, neither the gods nor death (which is the end) should be feared.<\/p>\n<p>When Paul spoke in that context, he used their own poets to proclaim things that they could barely comprehend: That the God who made everything is both personal and knowable; that he revealed himself clearly, historically, and definitively in Jesus Christ; that death is not followed by either the cessation of existence or the migration of the soul, but by judgment; and that the proof of all of this is the resurrection of Christ from the dead.<\/p>\n<p>What was foolishness to most of the Greeks of Athens turns out to be the ultimate truth: God is knowable, and can be known through Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ps 50:7-15; Isa 42:5-7; Acts 17:16-32; Rom 1:18-32; Col 1:15-23; 2:6-12; 1 Thes 1:9-10; Heb 1:1-4<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Unknown God<\/h3>\n<p>When Paul spoke to the Areopagus, the “high council of the city” of Athens (Acts 17:19), he was speaking to people who did not share his faith in the God of Abraham and Moses who had revealed himself “many times and in many ways to [his] ancestors through the prophets” (Heb 1:1). The members of his audience had a very different definition of the divine. A host of divinities inhabited their world, and the common people retained much of their belief in the ancient gods. But many of the cultural elite of Athens no longer believed in the gods in any literal sense. Instead, they held to either a form of materialism (the physical is everything) or pantheism (the divine inhabits everything).<\/p>\n<p>What they all shared in common was the absence of the idea that there is one true God who is Lord of all. Their myths told of the activities of various gods, but they did not have faith that the ultimate reality, God himself, could be known. Instead, they reasoned and discussed “the latest ideas,” hoping for a better understanding of the nature of things.<\/p>\n<p>There were a wide variety of philosophical ideas current in Athens when Paul visited, but two main schools of thought dominated, Stoicism and Epicureanism (Acts 17:18).<\/p>\n<p>Zeno of Citium (334~262 <span>BC<\/span>) founded Stoicism. Stoics studied nature’s laws and believed in the Logos, a pervasive organizing and sustaining force that gives all things their essential nature and so gives life and reason to humanity. The good life is one in which reason rules, and peace of mind and harmony with nature prevail. Many prominent statesmen were Stoics or influenced by Stoicism, including Cicero, Seneca, and Marcus Aurelius. Stoic ideas proved attractive to some Christians because of the similarities between the Stoic logos and the divine Logos (John 1:1-18), and between the idea of natural law and the law of God.<\/p>\n<p>Those who followed Epicurus (341–270 <span>BC<\/span>) were empiricists; they relied upon sense experience (as opposed to reason) for knowledge. Epicureans were concerned with natural evidence and were unenthusiastic about mathematics. Their focus was ethics, the study of right behavior; they judged the value of an action or thing in terms of the pleasure or pain it brought. Epicurus saw belief in gods (meddling and powerful beings who terrified ordinary mortals) as a serious threat to tranquility. For him and his followers, neither the gods nor death (which is the end) should be feared.<\/p>\n<p>When Paul spoke in that context, he used their own poets to proclaim things that they could barely comprehend: That the God who made everything is both personal and knowable; that he revealed himself clearly, historically, and definitively in Jesus Christ; that death is not followed by either the cessation of existence or the migration of the soul, but by judgment; and that the proof of all of this is the resurrection of Christ from the dead.<\/p>\n<p>What was foolishness to most of the Greeks of Athens turns out to be the ultimate truth: God is knowable, and can be known through Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ps 50:7-15; Isa 42:5-7; Acts 17:16-32; Rom 1:18-32; Col 1:15-23; 2:6-12; 1 Thes 1:9-10; Heb 1:1-4<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Unknown God When Paul spoke to the Areopagus, the “high council of the city” of Athens (Acts 17:19), he was speaking to people who did not share his faith in the God of Abraham and Moses who had revealed himself “many times and in many ways to [his] ancestors through the prophets” (Heb 1:1). The members of his audience had a very different definition of the divine. A host of divinities inhabited their world, and the common people retained much of their belief in the ancient gods. But many...","summary_en":"The Unknown God When Paul spoke to the Areopagus, the “high council of the city” of Athens (Acts 17:19), he was speaking to people who did not share his faith in the God of Abraham and Moses who had revealed himself “many times and in many ways to [his] ancestors through the prophets” (Heb 1:1). The members of his audience had a very different definition of the divine. A host of divinities inhabited their world, and the common people retained much of their belief in the ancient gods. But many...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":150272,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature","title_en":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature","content_ro":"<h3>The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature<\/h3>\n<p>Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he shares the nature of God himself. This claim was a major point of contention between Jesus and the religous leaders, who accused Jesus of blasphemy (John 5:16-18; 8:54-59; 10:30-39).<\/p>\n<p>The hymn also affirms that Jesus Christ came to earth in an act of immense humility—the infinite God became human (Phil 2:7; see Col 1:15; John 1:10-14; Heb 2:14, 17). Jesus Christ, the glorious Creator of the universe, died as a sacrificial offering for the sins of human beings so that we might be forgiven and be reconciled to God (Phil 2:8; see John 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Col 1:20, 22; 2:13-14; Heb 1:3; 10:9-14), as the Scriptures had foretold (see Isa 53:3-12).<\/p>\n<p>This hymn also affirms that God raised Jesus from the dead, has given him “the place of highest honor” in heaven (Phil 2:9), and conferred on him the title “Lord” (2:11; cp. Col 1:18). One day, all created beings will bow before him and acknowledge that he is Lord of the entire universe (Phil 2:9-11), deserving of the worship that God alone is worthy to receive (see Rev 5:8-14).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 53:3-12; John 1:1-2, 10-14; 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Phil 2:6-11; Col 1:15-22; 2:9, 13-14; Heb 1:1-3; 2:14, 17; 10:9-14; Rev 5:8-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature<\/h3>\n<p>Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he shares the nature of God himself. This claim was a major point of contention between Jesus and the religous leaders, who accused Jesus of blasphemy (John 5:16-18; 8:54-59; 10:30-39).<\/p>\n<p>The hymn also affirms that Jesus Christ came to earth in an act of immense humility—the infinite God became human (Phil 2:7; see Col 1:15; John 1:10-14; Heb 2:14, 17). Jesus Christ, the glorious Creator of the universe, died as a sacrificial offering for the sins of human beings so that we might be forgiven and be reconciled to God (Phil 2:8; see John 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Col 1:20, 22; 2:13-14; Heb 1:3; 10:9-14), as the Scriptures had foretold (see Isa 53:3-12).<\/p>\n<p>This hymn also affirms that God raised Jesus from the dead, has given him “the place of highest honor” in heaven (Phil 2:9), and conferred on him the title “Lord” (2:11; cp. Col 1:18). One day, all created beings will bow before him and acknowledge that he is Lord of the entire universe (Phil 2:9-11), deserving of the worship that God alone is worthy to receive (see Rev 5:8-14).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 53:3-12; John 1:1-2, 10-14; 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Phil 2:6-11; Col 1:15-22; 2:9, 13-14; Heb 1:1-3; 2:14, 17; 10:9-14; Rev 5:8-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he s...","summary_en":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he s...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":150548,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Word","title_en":"God’s Word","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Word<\/h3>\n<p>A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the universe and still governs it (Gen 1:3-28; Heb 1:3; 11:3).<\/p>\n<p>In the past, God’s word came primarily through angels or prophets, but now it has come preeminently in the person of Jesus, God’s Son (Heb 1:1-4; 2:3-4; cp. John 1:1-14). The word is to be heard, heeded, obeyed, and believed as a source of hope.<\/p>\n<p>Through his word, God initiates relationship with us and wants us to listen to him and respond in faith (see Gen 15:6; John 1:12). His word is authoritative and intentional, and it gives profound hope because God can be trusted to keep his promises (Heb 6:13-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-28; Deut 8:3; Pss 12:6; 19:8; 119:11, 89, 105; Isa 40:8; Jer 15:16; 23:29; 36:2; Matt 5:18; 7:24; John 1:1-14; 5:24; 2 Tim 3:16; Heb 1:1-4; 4:12; 6:13-20; 11:3; 1 Pet 1:25; 2 Pet 1:19-21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Word<\/h3>\n<p>A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the universe and still governs it (Gen 1:3-28; Heb 1:3; 11:3).<\/p>\n<p>In the past, God’s word came primarily through angels or prophets, but now it has come preeminently in the person of Jesus, God’s Son (Heb 1:1-4; 2:3-4; cp. John 1:1-14). The word is to be heard, heeded, obeyed, and believed as a source of hope.<\/p>\n<p>Through his word, God initiates relationship with us and wants us to listen to him and respond in faith (see Gen 15:6; John 1:12). His word is authoritative and intentional, and it gives profound hope because God can be trusted to keep his promises (Heb 6:13-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-28; Deut 8:3; Pss 12:6; 19:8; 119:11, 89, 105; Isa 40:8; Jer 15:16; 23:29; 36:2; Matt 5:18; 7:24; John 1:1-14; 5:24; 2 Tim 3:16; Heb 1:1-4; 4:12; 6:13-20; 11:3; 1 Pet 1:25; 2 Pet 1:19-21<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Word A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the ...","summary_en":"God’s Word A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"2":[{"id":19405,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jesus Christ","title_en":"Jesus Christ","content_ro":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","summary_en":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"3":[{"id":8014,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Creation","title_en":"Creation","content_ro":"<h3>CREATION<\/h3>\n<p>The divine act of making something out of nothing; the divine act of bringing the world into ordered existence. Human beings unaided by divine revelation cannot arrive at the biblical doctrine of Creation by theological, philosophical, or scientific speculation. According to the Bible, knowledge of Creation must come by God’s revelation (cf. Heb 11:3).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Understanding Creation<\/p>\n<p>• Creation and Theology<\/p>\n<p>• Creation and Science<\/p>\n<p>• The Issues Surrounding Evolution<\/p>\n<p>Creation, Science, and Morality<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"UnderstandingCreation\">Understanding Creation<\/p>\n<p>To start a discussion about Creation with a comparison of the Genesis record and modern science is to begin at the wrong place. One should first ask what the Creation account would have meant to a Hebrew person in Bible times; then one should ask what use the prophets of Israel made of the doctrine of Creation. The following are some points to be noted.<\/p>\n<p>1. Creation was a conquering of chaos. Most creation accounts from the ancient world began with a primeval chaos. The God who could conquer chaos was understood as the true and living God. Genesis 1 is a magnificent account of how the God of Israel brought the chaos of Genesis 1:2 into an ordered cosmos.<\/p>\n<li>2. Creation was prompted by God’s good will. It was the free act of God. It is good (Gn 1:4, 10, 12, 18, 21, 25, 31). On the basis of that fact, Christians assert that life is a gift of God. The Christian affirmation stands against all the nihilisms and pessimisms found in religious and philosophical history.<\/li>\n<li>3. Creation is under the shadow of sin (Rom 8:18-25). Scripture teaches that creation today is not seen in its original pristine purity but rather is seen as a world with a large measure of ambiguity.<\/li>\n<li>4. Creation is dependent upon God. The relationship of God to his creation is set out in Ephesians 4:6. God is above all; that is, he is transcendent. God is through all; that is, he works in all things. God is in all; that is, he is divinely present or immanent in the entire creation (Ps 90:1-4; cf. Jn 1:3; 1 Cor 8:6; Col 1:16-17).<\/li>\n<li>5. Creation is by the word of God (Gn 1; Heb 11:3). Students of literature have said that the creation of the world by the “word of God” is one of the most sublime of all human thoughts. Among other things it means creation by a Person. The vast expanse of the universe and the enormous number of stars and galaxies can numb a thoughtful person into a sense of meaninglessness. But when one knows that it was all created by the word of God, one knows that a Person is behind the frigid mask of the stellar spaces (Pss 8; 19; Rom 1:20).<\/li>\n<li>6. Creation as depicted in the Bible stands up to critical examination. Scholars have studied parallel accounts of other peoples of biblical times, and none of them has the majesty and theological purity of the Genesis account.<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CreationandTheology\">Creation and Theology<\/p>\n<p>The doctrine of Creation is built on the sum of all the biblical teachings on Creation. Examination of that material leads to a number of conclusions.<\/p>\n<p>1. The doctrine of Creation gives us our fundamental understanding of humanity. Men and women are in the image of God (Gn 1:26-27). That means, at least, that a human being is more than an animal, even though both were created from the dust of the earth and have much in common. Many conjectures have been made about the positive meaning of the expression “image of God.” If there is a common denominator, it is that human beings find their meaning, their destiny, and their worth in their special relationship to God.<\/p>\n<li>2. Parallel to the statement of humanity’s relationship to God is the affirmation that humanity is to be lord of God’s creation. Again, human beings are separated from the animal world, and their responsibility before God is specified (Gn 1:28; 2:15; Ps 8).<\/li>\n<li>3. Both male and female are in the image of God. That means that the divine image is borne equally by both sexes. It also means that sexuality in human beings has many more dimensions than sexuality among animals. The sexual life of human beings is therefore vastly richer than that of animals and subject to deeper corruption (Mk 10:2-9; 1 Cor 7:1-5; Eph 5:25-31; cf. Heb 13:4).<\/li>\n<li>4. The doctrine of prayer as “asking and receiving” is grounded in the providence of God, which in turn is grounded in Creation. There is meaning in petitionary prayer only if there is a sovereign Creator who can answer the petitions of his own creatures (Mt 6:5-13; Col 4:2; 1 Pt 5:6-7; Rv 8:3).<\/li>\n<li>5. The history of humanity and of Israel begins with Genesis 1. Creation begins history; it is not merely the premise of history. The God of Creation is the God of Abraham, of Moses, of the prophets, and of Jesus Christ.<\/li>\n<li>6. Creation is a witness to the existence and nature of God (Ps 19; Rom 1:18-19). In theology the expression used is “general revelation.” “General” means that it is a revelation witnessed by all people.<\/li>\n<li>7. Creation is a total creation. The Genesis account mentions certain bodies in the skies, certain creatures in the seas, certain plant and animal life on the earth. The number of species runs into the millions. Genesis does not attempt to list them but merely suggests such a list. God has made all that there is (cf. Jn 1:1-2). Therefore, there is never a threat to the believer in the Lord from any part of the universe. There is only one Lord, not many gods and lords, to whom all are called in obedience. The personal meaning is found in Romans 8:38-39, where the apostle Paul searches the entire universe and can find nothing in it, anywhere or at any time, that can separate a believer from the love of God in Christ.<\/li>\n<li>8. The chief theological use of the doctrine of Creation in the OT is to label idolatry for the sin that it is. Idolatry is the primeval lie and it leads to immorality, making a lie of one’s life.<\/li>\n<li>9. One of the remarkable doctrines of the NT is the “cosmic Christ”—which means he is the Creator and Sustainer of the universe (Jn 1:1-2; Col 1:16-17; Heb 1:3). The purpose of linking Christ with Creation is to show that he is more than a first-century Jew from Palestine.<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CreationandScience\">Creation and Science<\/p>\n<p>Does science prove Creation? Some scientists have thought that the innumerable conditions necessary for life, which do as a matter of fact exist on the earth, is such a proof. That argument has been called “cosmic theology.”<\/p>\n<p>Another so-called proof of Creation from science is the “big bang” theory of the origin of the universe. Although that view has forged ahead of its competitors, it is a theory of “first states” and not of the absolute origin of all things. The Christian doctrine of creation from nothing (Latin, <em>ex nihilo<\/em>) means more than that: it means that the absolute origin, sustaining, and meaning of all things is in the living Lord of Israel and of the church.<\/p>\n<p>Another argument comes from the second law of thermodynamics and the concept of entropy. (Entropy refers to the leveling off of energy or temperature to a state in which no energy is available.) Heat systems cool off. The universe is not infinitely old or it would now be cool. Since there are still stars and suns, the universe must have been created a finite time ago. A related argument is that it was necessary to create a universe that would run down. In so running down, it supplies heat to the earth so that the drama of God and man could unfold.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIssuesSurroundingEvolution\">The Issues Surrounding Evolution<\/p>\n<p>When Charles Darwin proposed biological evolution in the middle of the 19th century, many evangelical Christians took exception to it. They objected even more strenuously when books were written about human evolution. Two famous debates resulted from that controversy. In England the issue was debated in 1860 before the British Association at Oxford. That debate pitted Bishop Samuel Wilberforce (against the theory) against T. H. Huxley (for the theory). Although there was no formal decision, sentiment was with Huxley. The second debate was the famous Scopes trial in Dayton, Tennessee, in 1925. William Jennings Bryan defended the law that said that John T. Scopes should be found guilty of teaching evolution in the classroom. Clarence Darrow defended Scopes. Again, the sentiment was with the proponent of evolution, Darrow (although Bryan gave a sturdier defense of his beliefs than is generally acknowledged).<\/p>\n<p>Both orthodox Roman Catholics and evangelical Protestants have taken various views of the controversy, of which only a few can be mentioned.<\/p>\n<p>1. Some argue that evolution is contrary to the teachings of Scripture and is—in the name of science—actually the supreme defiance of Scripture’s authority. Thus, no quarter must ever be given in the battle against evolution.<\/p>\n<li>2. Others find a satisfactory resolution in “theistic evolution”—that is, God began the evolutionary process.<\/li>\n<li>3. Many see the parallels between the order of fossil-bearing strata in the so-called “geological column” and the six days of Creation as too close to be accidental. For them there is essential harmony between “Genesis and geology.”<\/li>\n<li>4. Many regard evolution as a theory like all other theories, which will be made or broken in the laboratory or in fieldwork. They see the doctrine of Creation as neither for nor against evolution. It is on a different level of explanation: “Science tells how; Scripture tells why.”<\/li>\n<li>5. Jesuit paleontologist Teilhard de Chardin attempted to save Christianity from evolution by “christifying” the whole evolutionary process.<\/li>\n<li>6. British author C. S. Lewis, among others, distinguished evolution from what might be called “evolutionism.” Lewis said that the validity of evolution as a narrow scientific thesis is for scientists to decide. But the notion of a total, all-encompassing evolutionary myth, as a human pseudodoctrine of Creation, is clearly not scientific.<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CreationScienceandMorality\">Creation, Science, and Morality<\/p>\n<p>The growth of world population and the spread of industrialization have produced the problem of local and worldwide pollution. The ecological crisis has been said by some scholars to be the fault of Christian faith, which inspired man—as the “lord of creation”—to exploit creation. But that is hardly the meaning of Genesis 1:28, which is an injunction to responsibility. A number of OT texts show clearly that the concern of Scripture is for human responsibility in God’s world; hence, Scripture parallels modern ecological concerns.<\/p>\n<p>Science stretches theological understanding by continually revising our knowledge of the universe, but the biblical doctrine of Creation does not retreat as science advances. For the Christian, the world studied by scientists and pondered by philosophers remains God’s created world.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Creation Myths; God, Being and Attributes of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CREATION<\/h3>\n<p>The divine act of making something out of nothing; the divine act of bringing the world into ordered existence. Human beings unaided by divine revelation cannot arrive at the biblical doctrine of Creation by theological, philosophical, or scientific speculation. According to the Bible, knowledge of Creation must come by God’s revelation (cf. Heb 11:3).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Understanding Creation<\/p>\n<p>• Creation and Theology<\/p>\n<p>• Creation and Science<\/p>\n<p>• The Issues Surrounding Evolution<\/p>\n<p>Creation, Science, and Morality<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"UnderstandingCreation\">Understanding Creation<\/p>\n<p>To start a discussion about Creation with a comparison of the Genesis record and modern science is to begin at the wrong place. One should first ask what the Creation account would have meant to a Hebrew person in Bible times; then one should ask what use the prophets of Israel made of the doctrine of Creation. The following are some points to be noted.<\/p>\n<p>1. Creation was a conquering of chaos. Most creation accounts from the ancient world began with a primeval chaos. The God who could conquer chaos was understood as the true and living God. Genesis 1 is a magnificent account of how the God of Israel brought the chaos of Genesis 1:2 into an ordered cosmos.<\/p>\n<li>2. Creation was prompted by God’s good will. It was the free act of God. It is good (Gn 1:4, 10, 12, 18, 21, 25, 31). On the basis of that fact, Christians assert that life is a gift of God. The Christian affirmation stands against all the nihilisms and pessimisms found in religious and philosophical history.<\/li>\n<li>3. Creation is under the shadow of sin (Rom 8:18-25). Scripture teaches that creation today is not seen in its original pristine purity but rather is seen as a world with a large measure of ambiguity.<\/li>\n<li>4. Creation is dependent upon God. The relationship of God to his creation is set out in Ephesians 4:6. God is above all; that is, he is transcendent. God is through all; that is, he works in all things. God is in all; that is, he is divinely present or immanent in the entire creation (Ps 90:1-4; cf. Jn 1:3; 1 Cor 8:6; Col 1:16-17).<\/li>\n<li>5. Creation is by the word of God (Gn 1; Heb 11:3). Students of literature have said that the creation of the world by the “word of God” is one of the most sublime of all human thoughts. Among other things it means creation by a Person. The vast expanse of the universe and the enormous number of stars and galaxies can numb a thoughtful person into a sense of meaninglessness. But when one knows that it was all created by the word of God, one knows that a Person is behind the frigid mask of the stellar spaces (Pss 8; 19; Rom 1:20).<\/li>\n<li>6. Creation as depicted in the Bible stands up to critical examination. Scholars have studied parallel accounts of other peoples of biblical times, and none of them has the majesty and theological purity of the Genesis account.<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CreationandTheology\">Creation and Theology<\/p>\n<p>The doctrine of Creation is built on the sum of all the biblical teachings on Creation. Examination of that material leads to a number of conclusions.<\/p>\n<p>1. The doctrine of Creation gives us our fundamental understanding of humanity. Men and women are in the image of God (Gn 1:26-27). That means, at least, that a human being is more than an animal, even though both were created from the dust of the earth and have much in common. Many conjectures have been made about the positive meaning of the expression “image of God.” If there is a common denominator, it is that human beings find their meaning, their destiny, and their worth in their special relationship to God.<\/p>\n<li>2. Parallel to the statement of humanity’s relationship to God is the affirmation that humanity is to be lord of God’s creation. Again, human beings are separated from the animal world, and their responsibility before God is specified (Gn 1:28; 2:15; Ps 8).<\/li>\n<li>3. Both male and female are in the image of God. That means that the divine image is borne equally by both sexes. It also means that sexuality in human beings has many more dimensions than sexuality among animals. The sexual life of human beings is therefore vastly richer than that of animals and subject to deeper corruption (Mk 10:2-9; 1 Cor 7:1-5; Eph 5:25-31; cf. Heb 13:4).<\/li>\n<li>4. The doctrine of prayer as “asking and receiving” is grounded in the providence of God, which in turn is grounded in Creation. There is meaning in petitionary prayer only if there is a sovereign Creator who can answer the petitions of his own creatures (Mt 6:5-13; Col 4:2; 1 Pt 5:6-7; Rv 8:3).<\/li>\n<li>5. The history of humanity and of Israel begins with Genesis 1. Creation begins history; it is not merely the premise of history. The God of Creation is the God of Abraham, of Moses, of the prophets, and of Jesus Christ.<\/li>\n<li>6. Creation is a witness to the existence and nature of God (Ps 19; Rom 1:18-19). In theology the expression used is “general revelation.” “General” means that it is a revelation witnessed by all people.<\/li>\n<li>7. Creation is a total creation. The Genesis account mentions certain bodies in the skies, certain creatures in the seas, certain plant and animal life on the earth. The number of species runs into the millions. Genesis does not attempt to list them but merely suggests such a list. God has made all that there is (cf. Jn 1:1-2). Therefore, there is never a threat to the believer in the Lord from any part of the universe. There is only one Lord, not many gods and lords, to whom all are called in obedience. The personal meaning is found in Romans 8:38-39, where the apostle Paul searches the entire universe and can find nothing in it, anywhere or at any time, that can separate a believer from the love of God in Christ.<\/li>\n<li>8. The chief theological use of the doctrine of Creation in the OT is to label idolatry for the sin that it is. Idolatry is the primeval lie and it leads to immorality, making a lie of one’s life.<\/li>\n<li>9. One of the remarkable doctrines of the NT is the “cosmic Christ”—which means he is the Creator and Sustainer of the universe (Jn 1:1-2; Col 1:16-17; Heb 1:3). The purpose of linking Christ with Creation is to show that he is more than a first-century Jew from Palestine.<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CreationandScience\">Creation and Science<\/p>\n<p>Does science prove Creation? Some scientists have thought that the innumerable conditions necessary for life, which do as a matter of fact exist on the earth, is such a proof. That argument has been called “cosmic theology.”<\/p>\n<p>Another so-called proof of Creation from science is the “big bang” theory of the origin of the universe. Although that view has forged ahead of its competitors, it is a theory of “first states” and not of the absolute origin of all things. The Christian doctrine of creation from nothing (Latin, <em>ex nihilo<\/em>) means more than that: it means that the absolute origin, sustaining, and meaning of all things is in the living Lord of Israel and of the church.<\/p>\n<p>Another argument comes from the second law of thermodynamics and the concept of entropy. (Entropy refers to the leveling off of energy or temperature to a state in which no energy is available.) Heat systems cool off. The universe is not infinitely old or it would now be cool. Since there are still stars and suns, the universe must have been created a finite time ago. A related argument is that it was necessary to create a universe that would run down. In so running down, it supplies heat to the earth so that the drama of God and man could unfold.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIssuesSurroundingEvolution\">The Issues Surrounding Evolution<\/p>\n<p>When Charles Darwin proposed biological evolution in the middle of the 19th century, many evangelical Christians took exception to it. They objected even more strenuously when books were written about human evolution. Two famous debates resulted from that controversy. In England the issue was debated in 1860 before the British Association at Oxford. That debate pitted Bishop Samuel Wilberforce (against the theory) against T. H. Huxley (for the theory). Although there was no formal decision, sentiment was with Huxley. The second debate was the famous Scopes trial in Dayton, Tennessee, in 1925. William Jennings Bryan defended the law that said that John T. Scopes should be found guilty of teaching evolution in the classroom. Clarence Darrow defended Scopes. Again, the sentiment was with the proponent of evolution, Darrow (although Bryan gave a sturdier defense of his beliefs than is generally acknowledged).<\/p>\n<p>Both orthodox Roman Catholics and evangelical Protestants have taken various views of the controversy, of which only a few can be mentioned.<\/p>\n<p>1. Some argue that evolution is contrary to the teachings of Scripture and is—in the name of science—actually the supreme defiance of Scripture’s authority. Thus, no quarter must ever be given in the battle against evolution.<\/p>\n<li>2. Others find a satisfactory resolution in “theistic evolution”—that is, God began the evolutionary process.<\/li>\n<li>3. Many see the parallels between the order of fossil-bearing strata in the so-called “geological column” and the six days of Creation as too close to be accidental. For them there is essential harmony between “Genesis and geology.”<\/li>\n<li>4. Many regard evolution as a theory like all other theories, which will be made or broken in the laboratory or in fieldwork. They see the doctrine of Creation as neither for nor against evolution. It is on a different level of explanation: “Science tells how; Scripture tells why.”<\/li>\n<li>5. Jesuit paleontologist Teilhard de Chardin attempted to save Christianity from evolution by “christifying” the whole evolutionary process.<\/li>\n<li>6. British author C. S. Lewis, among others, distinguished evolution from what might be called “evolutionism.” Lewis said that the validity of evolution as a narrow scientific thesis is for scientists to decide. But the notion of a total, all-encompassing evolutionary myth, as a human pseudodoctrine of Creation, is clearly not scientific.<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CreationScienceandMorality\">Creation, Science, and Morality<\/p>\n<p>The growth of world population and the spread of industrialization have produced the problem of local and worldwide pollution. The ecological crisis has been said by some scholars to be the fault of Christian faith, which inspired man—as the “lord of creation”—to exploit creation. But that is hardly the meaning of Genesis 1:28, which is an injunction to responsibility. A number of OT texts show clearly that the concern of Scripture is for human responsibility in God’s world; hence, Scripture parallels modern ecological concerns.<\/p>\n<p>Science stretches theological understanding by continually revising our knowledge of the universe, but the biblical doctrine of Creation does not retreat as science advances. For the Christian, the world studied by scientists and pondered by philosophers remains God’s created world.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Creation Myths; God, Being and Attributes of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CREATION The divine act of making something out of nothing; the divine act of bringing the world into ordered existence. Human beings unaided by divine revelation cannot arrive at the biblical doctrine of Creation by theological, philosophical, or scientific speculation. According to the Bible, knowledge of Creation must come by God’s revelation (cf. Heb 11:3). Preview • Understanding Creation • Creation and Theology • Creation and Science • The Issues Surrounding Evolution Creation, Science,...","summary_en":"CREATION The divine act of making something out of nothing; the divine act of bringing the world into ordered existence. Human beings unaided by divine revelation cannot arrive at the biblical doctrine of Creation by theological, philosophical, or scientific speculation. According to the Bible, knowledge of Creation must come by God’s revelation (cf. Heb 11:3). Preview • Understanding Creation • Creation and Theology • Creation and Science • The Issues Surrounding Evolution Creation, Science,...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19406,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jesus Christ","title_en":"Jesus Christ","content_ro":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","summary_en":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20199,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel of John","title_en":"Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>JOHN, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>The fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospels. (See discussion above on John, the Apostle.)<\/p>\n\n<p>The Gospel appears to have been written by one who knew the Jews and the Palestine of Jesus’ day well. He was familiar with Jewish messianic expectations (e.g., Jn 1:20-21; 4:25; 7:40-42; 12:34). He knew of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9) and the contempt the Pharisees had for “the people of the land” (7:49). He knew of the importance attached to the religious schools (v 15). He knew the way the Sabbath was observed and was aware of the provision that the obligation to circumcise on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath regulations (vv 22-23). Throughout the Gospel he moved with certainty in the vast range of Jewish ideas and customs.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same with topography. The writer mentioned many places, and his place-names all seem to be used correctly. He referred to Cana, a village not mentioned in any earlier literature known to us, which means that the reference almost certainly came from someone who actually knew the place. He located Bethany with some precision as about 15 stadia from Jerusalem (about 2 miles, or 3.2 kilometers, 11:18). He had several references to places in or near Jerusalem, such as Bethesda (5:2), Siloam (9:7), and the Kidron Valley (18:1). Of course, this does not rule out some contemporary of John’s, but it makes it difficult to think of the author as a much later individual writing at a distance from Palestine. The evidence as we have it indicates that the writer was a Jew in the Palestine of Jesus’ day.<\/p>\n<p>To many careful readers, it seems that the Gospel bears the stamp of an eyewitness. For example, Jesus was teaching “in the treasury” (8:20). Nothing is made of the point; the incident could easily have been told without it. It looks like a reminiscence of someone who sees the scene in his mind’s eye as he writes. The fact that the house was filled with fragrance when the woman broke the perfume jar (12:3) does not materially affect the account but is the kind of detail that one who was there would remember. The author noted that the loaves used in the feeding of the multitude were barley loaves (6:9) and that Jesus’ tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top to bottom (19:23). He told us that the branches with which Jesus was greeted were palm branches (12:13), and that it was night when Judas went out (13:30). Such touches are found throughout the Gospel, and it seems unjustified to treat them as no more than an attempt to create verisimilitude. They seem much more like indications that the author was writing about events in which he had himself taken part.<\/p>\n<p>The early church accepted Johannine authorship without question. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all see the apostle as the author. The first to quote this Gospel by name was Theophilus of Antioch, about <span>AD<\/span> 180.<\/p>\n<p>Those who object to Johannine authorship emphasize the differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics. The argument is that if Jesus was anything like the Christ portrayed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he could not be like the Christ of the fourth Gospel. This is a completely subjective argument, ignoring the fact that any great man will appear differently to different people. The judgment of the church throughout the centuries has been that Jesus was large enough to inspire both portraits. To put the same point another way, we have no reason for holding that the first three Evangelists tell us all there is to know about Jesus. There is no contradiction. John simply brings out other aspects of Jesus’ life and teachings.<\/p>\n<p>While we cannot prove beyond all doubt that John the apostle was the author, we can say that there is more reason for holding to this view than to any other.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>It has been usual for conservatives and liberals alike to date this writing in the last decade of the first century or early in the second. Some liberal scholars have put it well into the second century, but this is not common, and it is remarkable that there has been such a considerable measure of agreement.<\/p>\n<p>It is said that this Gospel is dependent on the Synoptics, which means that it must be dated sometime after them. But this argument has been widely abandoned in recent times. There is so much in John that is without parallel in the other three Gospels, and conversely so much in the other three that John might have used had he known it, that it is very difficult indeed to hold that this writer had any of the other Gospels before him when he wrote, or even that he had read them. Such resemblances as there are seem better explained by common use of oral tradition.<\/p>\n<p>It is also argued that there is a very developed theology in John and that we must allow time for its development. Granted, the theology of this Gospel is profound, but this does not require that we must wait for it until the end of the first century. The theology of the Letter to the Romans is also profound, and there is no reason for dating that writing later than the 50s. On the ground of development, then, there is no reason for putting John later than Romans. Development is a slippery argument at best, for it usually takes place at uneven rates, and we have no means of knowing how fast it took place in the area where the author lived.<\/p>\n<p>Other arguments for a late date are no more conclusive. For example, it is urged that the ecclesiastical system presupposed by the Gospel is too late for the time of the apostle John, and that the sacramental system of chapters 3 and 6 must have taken time to develop. But John does not mention any sacrament. It is true that many scholars think these chapters refer to baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but the fact is that John mentions neither.<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising in view of the way the traditional arguments have crumbled away that many in recent times are arguing that John must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70. If it were later, why does not John have some reference to it? Some of his language appears to be earlier. In 5:2 he says there “is” (not “was”) a pool called Bethesda. And he often refers to the Twelve as Jesus’ disciples, or “his” disciples, or the like. In later times Christians usually said “the” disciples, for they saw no need to say whose the disciples were. But in the early days, when Christians were in contact with rabbis (each of whom had his disciples), it was important to show that Jesus’ disciples were in mind. It is important also that John makes no reference to any of the synoptic Gospels. The simplest explanation is that he had not seen them. They were not yet widely circulated.<\/p>\n<p>None of this enables us to date this Gospel with precision. But the weight of evidence points to an early date (before <span>AD<\/span> 70).<\/p>\n<p>The author was John the apostle, a Jew. However, the writing gives evidence of contact with Greek thought, for example, in the reference to Christ as “the Word” in chapter 1 and the translation of words like “rabbi” (1:38). It is almost universally held that such considerations compel us to see the work as originating in a center of Greek culture, and Ephesus has traditionally been favored. Before the end of the second century we have Irenaeus writing that John published the Gospel during his residence at Ephesus.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to similarities between John and the Odes of Solomon, which they think came from Syria. As there are also some resemblances in the language of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, this is held to show that John was written in Syria, probably at Antioch. Others again think that Egypt was the place, and they support this by pointing out that the oldest fragment of a manuscript of this Gospel was found there. There is no real evidence, and we are left with probabilities. There is much to be said for accepting the evidence of Irenaeus and seeing Ephesus as the place of origin, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>There is no real indication of the intended destination. From 20:31 we learn that the book was written that the readers might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and that by believing they might have life. The Gospel, then, has an evangelistic aim. But it is also possible that “believe” means “keep on believing”—“go on in faith,” rather than “begin to believe.” That is to say, the book may have been meant from the beginning to build people up in the faith. Probably we should not distinguish between these aims too sharply. Both may well be in mind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Several possible backgrounds to the Gospel have been suggested. The Greek interest is obvious, and this writing has sometimes been called the Gospel of the Hellenists. The suggestion is that we should look to Greek writings, perhaps the works of the philosophers or Philo of Alexandria, to find the right background against which to understand what John has written. This approach may be seen in the work of Rudolf Bultmann, who thought specifically of Gnosticism. Indeed, for Bultmann one of the sources of this Gospel was a discourse source that he thought was taken from non-Christian Gnosticism. Not many have been prepared to follow Bultmann, but a number of recent commentators have discerned some form of Gnosticism as the backdrop to John.<\/p>\n<p>While such views are put forward seriously, there are some substantial objections. One is that, despite the confident assertions of some scholars, Gnosticism has never been shown to be earlier than Christianity. In the form in which it comes before us in history, it is a Christian heresy, and of course, the Christian faith must appear before a Christian heresy is possible. Another objection is that there is a basic difference between the two systems. Gnosticism is concerned with knowledge (the very word is derived from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>,<\/em> “knowledge”). Its “redeemer” is one who comes from heaven with knowledge. But John does not subscribe to the view that man is saved by knowledge. The Redeemer comes to take away the sin of the world (1:29). Gnosticism tells people that life is an upward struggle; Christianity tells of a Savior who came down to raise them up. It is not easy to see any form of Gnosticism as the essential background to Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Much more significant is John’s Semitic background. Especially important here is the OT, accepted as sacred Scripture by Jew and Christian alike. It lies constantly behind John’s statements, and it must be studied carefully if John is to be understood. It is plain that John knew and loved the Septuagint, the translation into Greek of the Hebrew OT. Again and again, the Septuagint can be shown to lie behind what John says.<\/p>\n<p>In modern times important discoveries have been made at Qumran, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. Among the scrolls unearthed in the caves of this area are several that have affinities with John. Indeed, one of the interesting facts about the scrolls is that they have more parallels with John than with any other part of the NT, a fact difficult to explain if John was written late and at a distance from Palestine. The resemblances to the Qumran writings must be viewed with care, for there is often a linguistic resemblance where the thinking is quite different. For example, both use the unusual expression “the Spirit of truth.” But where John means one of the persons of the Trinity, the scrolls speak of “a spirit of truth” and “a spirit of error” striving in the souls of people. The connection is real, but John is clearly not dependent on the scrolls for his thinking. The contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they afford additional evidence that this Gospel is basically Palestinian and must be understood against a background of first-century Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Other backgrounds have been suggested, such as the Hermetic literature. This is a group of writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus (“Hermes Thrice-greatest”), a designation of the Egyptian god Thoth. There are indeed some points of contact with John, but they are few in comparison with those of writings rooted in Palestine. It is difficult to take such suggestions seriously. John is essentially Palestinian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The writer told us that Jesus did many “signs” (or miracles) that he had not recorded, but “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life” (Jn 20:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). John wrote to show that Jesus is the Messiah. But he did not do this simply with a view to conveying interesting information. He wanted his readers to see this knowledge as a challenge to faith; when they believe, they will have life. John sought to bring men and women to Christ; he had an evangelistic aim. That does not exhaust what he was trying to do, for his words have meaning for believers. It is important that believers have a right knowledge of Jesus and that they continue to believe.<\/p>\n<p>The main theological teaching of this Gospel, then, is that God has sent his Messiah, Jesus. He is the very Son of God, and he comes to bring life (3:16). Though Jesus told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, this is not often said so specifically. The avoidance of the term might well be because of the political overtones it had acquired among the Jews at large. They looked for a Messiah who would fight the Romans. He would defeat them and set up a mighty world empire with its capital in Jerusalem. Jesus was not aiming at anything like that, and it was important that he avoid the kind of language that would give that impression. But though the conventional messianic terminology is avoided, John left no doubt that Jesus was God’s chosen one. Again and again he depicted Jesus as fulfilling messianic functions. For example, in the long discourse in chapter 6 we see Jesus as the bread from heaven, fulfilling the expectation that when Messiah came, he would renew the manna; and in the giving of sight to the blind man (ch 9) we have another messianic function (cf. Is 35:5).<\/p>\n<p>With this greatness of Jesus, John also combined teaching about his lowliness. A continuing, though unobtrusive, strand of Johannine teaching is that Jesus depends on the Father for everything. Apart from the Father, Jesus said, he could do nothing (Jn 5:30). His very food is to do the Father’s will (4:34). He lives through the Father (6:57). It is the Father who gives him his disciples (6:37, 44; 17:6). It is the Father who bears witness to him (5:32, 37). John insists that Jesus is in no sense independent of the Father. In the mission of Jesus, John sees the working out of the purpose of the Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue and Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>John begins with a prologue (1:1-18) that is unlike anything in any of the other Gospels. In it he refers to Jesus as “the Word,” a term that has points of contact with both Greek and Hebrew thinking. As John uses it, it conveys the thought that Jesus is the expression of the mind of the Father. John speaks of the Word as God (1:1), sees him as active in creation (1:3-5), goes on to the witness borne to him by John the Baptist (1:6-8), speaks of the coming of the Word into the world (1:9-14), and finishes with a section on the greatness of the Word (1:15-18). In this prologue he briefly introduces some of the great themes that will be developed throughout the Gospel. It is a majestic introduction to the whole.<\/p>\n<p>Next we have the beginnings of Jesus’ public ministry (1:19-51). Jesus’ work was preceded by that of John the Baptist, and the Evangelist tells us first about the kind of witness that the Baptist gave to Jesus. Witness is one of his important concepts, and witness is all that John the Baptist does in this Gospel. From this witness we move to the way the first disciples came to Jesus. We learn something of how Andrew and Peter came to know the Lord. We read also of Philip and Nathanael, of whom we learn little or nothing in the other Gospels.<\/p>\n<h5>The Signs and Discourses (2:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The public ministry of Jesus is described in a very distinctive way in this Gospel. John has a long section (chs 2–12) in which he tells of a number of miracles Jesus did, interweaving into his account a series of discourses. Sometimes these are addresses given to groups of people, and sometimes they are talks with individuals. Some scholars call this section of the Gospel the Book of Signs, thus emphasizing the prominent place given to seven miracles. For John they are not simply wonders. They are meaningful; in the literal sense of the term they are <em>sign<\/em>ificant.<\/p>\n<p>The first of them is the turning of the water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee (2:1-11). The water in question is connected with Jewish rites of purification (v 6), and the story is surely to teach us that Jesus transforms life. He changes the water of the law into the wine of the gospel. As a result of this “sign,” his disciples believed in him (v 11). John went on to tell how Jesus went up to Jerusalem and drove the traders out of the temple. They were selling animals for sacrifice and changing money. But their business was being done in the Court of the Gentiles, the only place in the temple where a Gentile could come to meditate and pray.<\/p>\n<p>The first discourse is on the new birth (3:1-21). Jesus talked with Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, about the necessity for radical renewal if one is to enter the kingdom. Jesus was speaking of God’s regenerating activity, not some human reformation. Following this, John records a dispute between some of John’s disciples with a Jew on the subject of purification. This opens the way for a section that shows the superiority of Jesus over John the Baptist—by the Baptist’s own confession (3:22-36).<\/p>\n<p>The second discourse is really a long conversation Jesus had with the woman of Samaria, whom he met by a well (4:1-42). It turns on “the water of life,” a term that is not fully explained in this chapter but which we later find points to the life-giving Spirit (7:38-39). This leads to the story of the second sign, the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54), notable for the fact that Jesus healed at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>The third sign is the healing of the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (5:1-18). This man had spent many years waiting for healing at the moving of the water. Jesus told him to get up and walk, and he did. Because it was done on a Sabbath, the Pharisees objected. This leads to Jesus’ third discourse, that on the divine Son (5:19-47). Here the closeness of the relationship of Jesus to the Father is stressed, and his place in the judgment is brought out. There is emphasis also on the variety of witness who encountered Jesus, which shows how reasonable it is to accept him as God’s own Son.<\/p>\n<p>John’s fourth sign is the one miracle (apart from the resurrection) found in all four Gospels: the feeding of the 5,000 (6:1-15). It is followed by Jesus’ walking on water (vv 16-21), which seems to be meant as the fifth sign (though some scholars think not; if they are right, there are only six signs). Then comes the fourth discourse, the great sermon on the bread of life (vv 22-59). Jesus is this bread, which he gives to all men and women who believe in him. There are references to eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv 50-58), which point to his death. Some have seen in them a reference to Communion, but it is hard to see why Jesus should refer in this way to an as-yet-nonexistent sacrament. Moreover, much the same effect is attributed in the same discourse to believing (vv 35, 47). It seems best to understand Jesus as meaning that people must believe in him as the one who would die for them in order for them to have life.<\/p>\n<p>There is a section detailing Peter’s affirmation of loyalty in the face of some who drifted away from the Master (6:67-71). Then we come to the fifth discourse, on the life-giving Spirit (7:1-52). John has an important explanatory point of his own when he tells us that at the time the Spirit had not been given because Jesus had not yet been glorified (v 39). The fullness of the Spirit depends on the completion of the work of Christ in his death and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The sixth discourse tells of the light of the world (8:12-59). This aspect of Jesus’ person and ministry is dramatically brought out in the sixth sign, the healing of the man born blind (ch 9). It is a lively narrative, as the healed man conducts a spirited defense against the Pharisees who belittled Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most beautiful of all the illustrations of Jesus’ relations to his people is that on which he dwells in the seventh discourse, where he speaks of himself as the good shepherd (ch 10). There is the obvious truth that sheep depend entirely on their shepherd, but Jesus says something else. Whereas earthly shepherds live to meet the needs of their sheep, Jesus laid down his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The final sign is the raising of Lazarus (11:1-44), a man who had been dead for four days. The story graphically brings out Jesus’ power over death and his readiness to confer the gift of life. Jesus speaks of himself as “the resurrection and the life” (v 25); death cannot defeat him. He brings life to the dead, to the spiritually dead as well as to physically dead Lazarus. John goes on to note the reaction to this miracle: some believed, but some opposed Jesus (vv 45-57). He includes a notable saying of Caiaphas, the high priest, that one man should die for the people (vv 50-52). Caiaphas was speaking as a cynical politician (better one dead, however innocent, than the whole nation be troubled). But John saw in the words the deeper meaning that Jesus’ death would bring salvation to many.<\/p>\n<p>John rounds off his account of the ministry with the story of the anointing of Jesus by a woman in Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the coming of some Greeks to Jesus, and his final summary of what he had taught (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Last Supper<\/h5>\n<p>The account of what went on in the upper room on the night before the Crucifixion is the fullest of all the four Gospels. Curiously, John says nothing about the institution of Communion, a fact that has never been satisfactorily explained. But he tells us how Jesus washed the feet of the disciples (13:1-17), an action splendidly exemplifying the spirit of lowly service so soon to be shown on the cross. Then comes the prophecy of the betrayal, an action that set in motion the events that would lead to the cross (vv 18-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the long discourse that follows, Jesus dealt with some questions posed by his followers and went on to teach them some important truths, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). He develops the thought that he is the true vine, the disciples being vitally joined to him as branches to the vine. It is important for the branches to remain in the vine if they are to have life (15:1-16). Then come some words about suffering that would be of help to them in times of persecution (vv 17-25). Jesus goes on to speak about the Holy Spirit (15:26–16:15). This is a very important passage, for it contains much more about the Spirit than we find elsewhere in Jesus’ words. Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete,” a title not easy to understand. It is in origin a legal term, and at least we can say that it indicates that the Spirit brings friendship, encouragement, and help. Jesus went on to speak of his approaching departure from the disciples and to prepare them for the trying time ahead (16:16-33). This part of the Gospel concludes with Jesus’ great High Priestly prayer. He prayed for the disciples to be one, as he commended them to the care of the heavenly Father (ch 17).<\/p>\n<h5>The Cross and Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, he went forward to meet them and they fell to the ground (18:1-11). He gave himself over to them; they did not take him over. At the outset of his passion narrative, John was making the point that Jesus is sovereign. He was not being defeated by the march of events but was sovereignly doing the will of the Father. John is the only one to tell us that Jesus was taken before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, the reigning high priest (18:12-14, 19-24). He tells also of Peter’s three denials of Jesus (vv 15-27). He did not spend much time on the Jewish trial, but he was much more explicit than the other Evangelists in his account of the Roman trial. Clearly, he had some special knowledge of what went on before Pilate. He presents a magnificent picture of Jesus talking with Pilate about kingship—the Son of God discussing with the representative of Caesar the meaning of sovereignty (vv 33-40).<\/p>\n<p>In his account of the Crucifixion John has a number of touches of his own, notably the way Jesus commended Mary to the care of the beloved disciple (19:26-27), the fact that the cry Jesus uttered as he died was “It is finished” (v 30), and the piercing of his side by a soldier’s spear (vv 31-37).<\/p>\n<p>John proceeds to the narrative of the burial (vv 38-42) and of the empty tomb (20:1-10). He speaks of appearances of the risen Lord to Mary Magdalene (vv 11-18), and to the disciples—both without (vv 19-23) and with Thomas (vv 24-29).<\/p>\n<p>The final chapter, an epilogue, tells of a miraculous catch of fish (21:1-14) and goes on to the moving account of Peter’s threefold declaration of love to Jesus and his restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOHN, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>The fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospels. (See discussion above on John, the Apostle.)<\/p>\n\n<p>The Gospel appears to have been written by one who knew the Jews and the Palestine of Jesus’ day well. He was familiar with Jewish messianic expectations (e.g., Jn 1:20-21; 4:25; 7:40-42; 12:34). He knew of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9) and the contempt the Pharisees had for “the people of the land” (7:49). He knew of the importance attached to the religious schools (v 15). He knew the way the Sabbath was observed and was aware of the provision that the obligation to circumcise on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath regulations (vv 22-23). Throughout the Gospel he moved with certainty in the vast range of Jewish ideas and customs.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same with topography. The writer mentioned many places, and his place-names all seem to be used correctly. He referred to Cana, a village not mentioned in any earlier literature known to us, which means that the reference almost certainly came from someone who actually knew the place. He located Bethany with some precision as about 15 stadia from Jerusalem (about 2 miles, or 3.2 kilometers, 11:18). He had several references to places in or near Jerusalem, such as Bethesda (5:2), Siloam (9:7), and the Kidron Valley (18:1). Of course, this does not rule out some contemporary of John’s, but it makes it difficult to think of the author as a much later individual writing at a distance from Palestine. The evidence as we have it indicates that the writer was a Jew in the Palestine of Jesus’ day.<\/p>\n<p>To many careful readers, it seems that the Gospel bears the stamp of an eyewitness. For example, Jesus was teaching “in the treasury” (8:20). Nothing is made of the point; the incident could easily have been told without it. It looks like a reminiscence of someone who sees the scene in his mind’s eye as he writes. The fact that the house was filled with fragrance when the woman broke the perfume jar (12:3) does not materially affect the account but is the kind of detail that one who was there would remember. The author noted that the loaves used in the feeding of the multitude were barley loaves (6:9) and that Jesus’ tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top to bottom (19:23). He told us that the branches with which Jesus was greeted were palm branches (12:13), and that it was night when Judas went out (13:30). Such touches are found throughout the Gospel, and it seems unjustified to treat them as no more than an attempt to create verisimilitude. They seem much more like indications that the author was writing about events in which he had himself taken part.<\/p>\n<p>The early church accepted Johannine authorship without question. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all see the apostle as the author. The first to quote this Gospel by name was Theophilus of Antioch, about <span>AD<\/span> 180.<\/p>\n<p>Those who object to Johannine authorship emphasize the differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics. The argument is that if Jesus was anything like the Christ portrayed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he could not be like the Christ of the fourth Gospel. This is a completely subjective argument, ignoring the fact that any great man will appear differently to different people. The judgment of the church throughout the centuries has been that Jesus was large enough to inspire both portraits. To put the same point another way, we have no reason for holding that the first three Evangelists tell us all there is to know about Jesus. There is no contradiction. John simply brings out other aspects of Jesus’ life and teachings.<\/p>\n<p>While we cannot prove beyond all doubt that John the apostle was the author, we can say that there is more reason for holding to this view than to any other.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>It has been usual for conservatives and liberals alike to date this writing in the last decade of the first century or early in the second. Some liberal scholars have put it well into the second century, but this is not common, and it is remarkable that there has been such a considerable measure of agreement.<\/p>\n<p>It is said that this Gospel is dependent on the Synoptics, which means that it must be dated sometime after them. But this argument has been widely abandoned in recent times. There is so much in John that is without parallel in the other three Gospels, and conversely so much in the other three that John might have used had he known it, that it is very difficult indeed to hold that this writer had any of the other Gospels before him when he wrote, or even that he had read them. Such resemblances as there are seem better explained by common use of oral tradition.<\/p>\n<p>It is also argued that there is a very developed theology in John and that we must allow time for its development. Granted, the theology of this Gospel is profound, but this does not require that we must wait for it until the end of the first century. The theology of the Letter to the Romans is also profound, and there is no reason for dating that writing later than the 50s. On the ground of development, then, there is no reason for putting John later than Romans. Development is a slippery argument at best, for it usually takes place at uneven rates, and we have no means of knowing how fast it took place in the area where the author lived.<\/p>\n<p>Other arguments for a late date are no more conclusive. For example, it is urged that the ecclesiastical system presupposed by the Gospel is too late for the time of the apostle John, and that the sacramental system of chapters 3 and 6 must have taken time to develop. But John does not mention any sacrament. It is true that many scholars think these chapters refer to baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but the fact is that John mentions neither.<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising in view of the way the traditional arguments have crumbled away that many in recent times are arguing that John must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70. If it were later, why does not John have some reference to it? Some of his language appears to be earlier. In 5:2 he says there “is” (not “was”) a pool called Bethesda. And he often refers to the Twelve as Jesus’ disciples, or “his” disciples, or the like. In later times Christians usually said “the” disciples, for they saw no need to say whose the disciples were. But in the early days, when Christians were in contact with rabbis (each of whom had his disciples), it was important to show that Jesus’ disciples were in mind. It is important also that John makes no reference to any of the synoptic Gospels. The simplest explanation is that he had not seen them. They were not yet widely circulated.<\/p>\n<p>None of this enables us to date this Gospel with precision. But the weight of evidence points to an early date (before <span>AD<\/span> 70).<\/p>\n<p>The author was John the apostle, a Jew. However, the writing gives evidence of contact with Greek thought, for example, in the reference to Christ as “the Word” in chapter 1 and the translation of words like “rabbi” (1:38). It is almost universally held that such considerations compel us to see the work as originating in a center of Greek culture, and Ephesus has traditionally been favored. Before the end of the second century we have Irenaeus writing that John published the Gospel during his residence at Ephesus.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to similarities between John and the Odes of Solomon, which they think came from Syria. As there are also some resemblances in the language of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, this is held to show that John was written in Syria, probably at Antioch. Others again think that Egypt was the place, and they support this by pointing out that the oldest fragment of a manuscript of this Gospel was found there. There is no real evidence, and we are left with probabilities. There is much to be said for accepting the evidence of Irenaeus and seeing Ephesus as the place of origin, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>There is no real indication of the intended destination. From 20:31 we learn that the book was written that the readers might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and that by believing they might have life. The Gospel, then, has an evangelistic aim. But it is also possible that “believe” means “keep on believing”—“go on in faith,” rather than “begin to believe.” That is to say, the book may have been meant from the beginning to build people up in the faith. Probably we should not distinguish between these aims too sharply. Both may well be in mind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Several possible backgrounds to the Gospel have been suggested. The Greek interest is obvious, and this writing has sometimes been called the Gospel of the Hellenists. The suggestion is that we should look to Greek writings, perhaps the works of the philosophers or Philo of Alexandria, to find the right background against which to understand what John has written. This approach may be seen in the work of Rudolf Bultmann, who thought specifically of Gnosticism. Indeed, for Bultmann one of the sources of this Gospel was a discourse source that he thought was taken from non-Christian Gnosticism. Not many have been prepared to follow Bultmann, but a number of recent commentators have discerned some form of Gnosticism as the backdrop to John.<\/p>\n<p>While such views are put forward seriously, there are some substantial objections. One is that, despite the confident assertions of some scholars, Gnosticism has never been shown to be earlier than Christianity. In the form in which it comes before us in history, it is a Christian heresy, and of course, the Christian faith must appear before a Christian heresy is possible. Another objection is that there is a basic difference between the two systems. Gnosticism is concerned with knowledge (the very word is derived from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>,<\/em> “knowledge”). Its “redeemer” is one who comes from heaven with knowledge. But John does not subscribe to the view that man is saved by knowledge. The Redeemer comes to take away the sin of the world (1:29). Gnosticism tells people that life is an upward struggle; Christianity tells of a Savior who came down to raise them up. It is not easy to see any form of Gnosticism as the essential background to Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Much more significant is John’s Semitic background. Especially important here is the OT, accepted as sacred Scripture by Jew and Christian alike. It lies constantly behind John’s statements, and it must be studied carefully if John is to be understood. It is plain that John knew and loved the Septuagint, the translation into Greek of the Hebrew OT. Again and again, the Septuagint can be shown to lie behind what John says.<\/p>\n<p>In modern times important discoveries have been made at Qumran, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. Among the scrolls unearthed in the caves of this area are several that have affinities with John. Indeed, one of the interesting facts about the scrolls is that they have more parallels with John than with any other part of the NT, a fact difficult to explain if John was written late and at a distance from Palestine. The resemblances to the Qumran writings must be viewed with care, for there is often a linguistic resemblance where the thinking is quite different. For example, both use the unusual expression “the Spirit of truth.” But where John means one of the persons of the Trinity, the scrolls speak of “a spirit of truth” and “a spirit of error” striving in the souls of people. The connection is real, but John is clearly not dependent on the scrolls for his thinking. The contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they afford additional evidence that this Gospel is basically Palestinian and must be understood against a background of first-century Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Other backgrounds have been suggested, such as the Hermetic literature. This is a group of writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus (“Hermes Thrice-greatest”), a designation of the Egyptian god Thoth. There are indeed some points of contact with John, but they are few in comparison with those of writings rooted in Palestine. It is difficult to take such suggestions seriously. John is essentially Palestinian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The writer told us that Jesus did many “signs” (or miracles) that he had not recorded, but “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life” (Jn 20:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). John wrote to show that Jesus is the Messiah. But he did not do this simply with a view to conveying interesting information. He wanted his readers to see this knowledge as a challenge to faith; when they believe, they will have life. John sought to bring men and women to Christ; he had an evangelistic aim. That does not exhaust what he was trying to do, for his words have meaning for believers. It is important that believers have a right knowledge of Jesus and that they continue to believe.<\/p>\n<p>The main theological teaching of this Gospel, then, is that God has sent his Messiah, Jesus. He is the very Son of God, and he comes to bring life (3:16). Though Jesus told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, this is not often said so specifically. The avoidance of the term might well be because of the political overtones it had acquired among the Jews at large. They looked for a Messiah who would fight the Romans. He would defeat them and set up a mighty world empire with its capital in Jerusalem. Jesus was not aiming at anything like that, and it was important that he avoid the kind of language that would give that impression. But though the conventional messianic terminology is avoided, John left no doubt that Jesus was God’s chosen one. Again and again he depicted Jesus as fulfilling messianic functions. For example, in the long discourse in chapter 6 we see Jesus as the bread from heaven, fulfilling the expectation that when Messiah came, he would renew the manna; and in the giving of sight to the blind man (ch 9) we have another messianic function (cf. Is 35:5).<\/p>\n<p>With this greatness of Jesus, John also combined teaching about his lowliness. A continuing, though unobtrusive, strand of Johannine teaching is that Jesus depends on the Father for everything. Apart from the Father, Jesus said, he could do nothing (Jn 5:30). His very food is to do the Father’s will (4:34). He lives through the Father (6:57). It is the Father who gives him his disciples (6:37, 44; 17:6). It is the Father who bears witness to him (5:32, 37). John insists that Jesus is in no sense independent of the Father. In the mission of Jesus, John sees the working out of the purpose of the Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue and Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>John begins with a prologue (1:1-18) that is unlike anything in any of the other Gospels. In it he refers to Jesus as “the Word,” a term that has points of contact with both Greek and Hebrew thinking. As John uses it, it conveys the thought that Jesus is the expression of the mind of the Father. John speaks of the Word as God (1:1), sees him as active in creation (1:3-5), goes on to the witness borne to him by John the Baptist (1:6-8), speaks of the coming of the Word into the world (1:9-14), and finishes with a section on the greatness of the Word (1:15-18). In this prologue he briefly introduces some of the great themes that will be developed throughout the Gospel. It is a majestic introduction to the whole.<\/p>\n<p>Next we have the beginnings of Jesus’ public ministry (1:19-51). Jesus’ work was preceded by that of John the Baptist, and the Evangelist tells us first about the kind of witness that the Baptist gave to Jesus. Witness is one of his important concepts, and witness is all that John the Baptist does in this Gospel. From this witness we move to the way the first disciples came to Jesus. We learn something of how Andrew and Peter came to know the Lord. We read also of Philip and Nathanael, of whom we learn little or nothing in the other Gospels.<\/p>\n<h5>The Signs and Discourses (2:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The public ministry of Jesus is described in a very distinctive way in this Gospel. John has a long section (chs 2–12) in which he tells of a number of miracles Jesus did, interweaving into his account a series of discourses. Sometimes these are addresses given to groups of people, and sometimes they are talks with individuals. Some scholars call this section of the Gospel the Book of Signs, thus emphasizing the prominent place given to seven miracles. For John they are not simply wonders. They are meaningful; in the literal sense of the term they are <em>sign<\/em>ificant.<\/p>\n<p>The first of them is the turning of the water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee (2:1-11). The water in question is connected with Jewish rites of purification (v 6), and the story is surely to teach us that Jesus transforms life. He changes the water of the law into the wine of the gospel. As a result of this “sign,” his disciples believed in him (v 11). John went on to tell how Jesus went up to Jerusalem and drove the traders out of the temple. They were selling animals for sacrifice and changing money. But their business was being done in the Court of the Gentiles, the only place in the temple where a Gentile could come to meditate and pray.<\/p>\n<p>The first discourse is on the new birth (3:1-21). Jesus talked with Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, about the necessity for radical renewal if one is to enter the kingdom. Jesus was speaking of God’s regenerating activity, not some human reformation. Following this, John records a dispute between some of John’s disciples with a Jew on the subject of purification. This opens the way for a section that shows the superiority of Jesus over John the Baptist—by the Baptist’s own confession (3:22-36).<\/p>\n<p>The second discourse is really a long conversation Jesus had with the woman of Samaria, whom he met by a well (4:1-42). It turns on “the water of life,” a term that is not fully explained in this chapter but which we later find points to the life-giving Spirit (7:38-39). This leads to the story of the second sign, the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54), notable for the fact that Jesus healed at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>The third sign is the healing of the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (5:1-18). This man had spent many years waiting for healing at the moving of the water. Jesus told him to get up and walk, and he did. Because it was done on a Sabbath, the Pharisees objected. This leads to Jesus’ third discourse, that on the divine Son (5:19-47). Here the closeness of the relationship of Jesus to the Father is stressed, and his place in the judgment is brought out. There is emphasis also on the variety of witness who encountered Jesus, which shows how reasonable it is to accept him as God’s own Son.<\/p>\n<p>John’s fourth sign is the one miracle (apart from the resurrection) found in all four Gospels: the feeding of the 5,000 (6:1-15). It is followed by Jesus’ walking on water (vv 16-21), which seems to be meant as the fifth sign (though some scholars think not; if they are right, there are only six signs). Then comes the fourth discourse, the great sermon on the bread of life (vv 22-59). Jesus is this bread, which he gives to all men and women who believe in him. There are references to eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv 50-58), which point to his death. Some have seen in them a reference to Communion, but it is hard to see why Jesus should refer in this way to an as-yet-nonexistent sacrament. Moreover, much the same effect is attributed in the same discourse to believing (vv 35, 47). It seems best to understand Jesus as meaning that people must believe in him as the one who would die for them in order for them to have life.<\/p>\n<p>There is a section detailing Peter’s affirmation of loyalty in the face of some who drifted away from the Master (6:67-71). Then we come to the fifth discourse, on the life-giving Spirit (7:1-52). John has an important explanatory point of his own when he tells us that at the time the Spirit had not been given because Jesus had not yet been glorified (v 39). The fullness of the Spirit depends on the completion of the work of Christ in his death and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The sixth discourse tells of the light of the world (8:12-59). This aspect of Jesus’ person and ministry is dramatically brought out in the sixth sign, the healing of the man born blind (ch 9). It is a lively narrative, as the healed man conducts a spirited defense against the Pharisees who belittled Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most beautiful of all the illustrations of Jesus’ relations to his people is that on which he dwells in the seventh discourse, where he speaks of himself as the good shepherd (ch 10). There is the obvious truth that sheep depend entirely on their shepherd, but Jesus says something else. Whereas earthly shepherds live to meet the needs of their sheep, Jesus laid down his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The final sign is the raising of Lazarus (11:1-44), a man who had been dead for four days. The story graphically brings out Jesus’ power over death and his readiness to confer the gift of life. Jesus speaks of himself as “the resurrection and the life” (v 25); death cannot defeat him. He brings life to the dead, to the spiritually dead as well as to physically dead Lazarus. John goes on to note the reaction to this miracle: some believed, but some opposed Jesus (vv 45-57). He includes a notable saying of Caiaphas, the high priest, that one man should die for the people (vv 50-52). Caiaphas was speaking as a cynical politician (better one dead, however innocent, than the whole nation be troubled). But John saw in the words the deeper meaning that Jesus’ death would bring salvation to many.<\/p>\n<p>John rounds off his account of the ministry with the story of the anointing of Jesus by a woman in Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the coming of some Greeks to Jesus, and his final summary of what he had taught (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Last Supper<\/h5>\n<p>The account of what went on in the upper room on the night before the Crucifixion is the fullest of all the four Gospels. Curiously, John says nothing about the institution of Communion, a fact that has never been satisfactorily explained. But he tells us how Jesus washed the feet of the disciples (13:1-17), an action splendidly exemplifying the spirit of lowly service so soon to be shown on the cross. Then comes the prophecy of the betrayal, an action that set in motion the events that would lead to the cross (vv 18-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the long discourse that follows, Jesus dealt with some questions posed by his followers and went on to teach them some important truths, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). He develops the thought that he is the true vine, the disciples being vitally joined to him as branches to the vine. It is important for the branches to remain in the vine if they are to have life (15:1-16). Then come some words about suffering that would be of help to them in times of persecution (vv 17-25). Jesus goes on to speak about the Holy Spirit (15:26–16:15). This is a very important passage, for it contains much more about the Spirit than we find elsewhere in Jesus’ words. Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete,” a title not easy to understand. It is in origin a legal term, and at least we can say that it indicates that the Spirit brings friendship, encouragement, and help. Jesus went on to speak of his approaching departure from the disciples and to prepare them for the trying time ahead (16:16-33). This part of the Gospel concludes with Jesus’ great High Priestly prayer. He prayed for the disciples to be one, as he commended them to the care of the heavenly Father (ch 17).<\/p>\n<h5>The Cross and Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, he went forward to meet them and they fell to the ground (18:1-11). He gave himself over to them; they did not take him over. At the outset of his passion narrative, John was making the point that Jesus is sovereign. He was not being defeated by the march of events but was sovereignly doing the will of the Father. John is the only one to tell us that Jesus was taken before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, the reigning high priest (18:12-14, 19-24). He tells also of Peter’s three denials of Jesus (vv 15-27). He did not spend much time on the Jewish trial, but he was much more explicit than the other Evangelists in his account of the Roman trial. Clearly, he had some special knowledge of what went on before Pilate. He presents a magnificent picture of Jesus talking with Pilate about kingship—the Son of God discussing with the representative of Caesar the meaning of sovereignty (vv 33-40).<\/p>\n<p>In his account of the Crucifixion John has a number of touches of his own, notably the way Jesus commended Mary to the care of the beloved disciple (19:26-27), the fact that the cry Jesus uttered as he died was “It is finished” (v 30), and the piercing of his side by a soldier’s spear (vv 31-37).<\/p>\n<p>John proceeds to the narrative of the burial (vv 38-42) and of the empty tomb (20:1-10). He speaks of appearances of the risen Lord to Mary Magdalene (vv 11-18), and to the disciples—both without (vv 19-23) and with Thomas (vv 24-29).<\/p>\n<p>The final chapter, an epilogue, tells of a miraculous catch of fish (21:1-14) and goes on to the moving account of Peter’s threefold declaration of love to Jesus and his restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOHN, Gospel of The fourth Gospel. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospe...","summary_en":"JOHN, Gospel of The fourth Gospel. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospe...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":27445,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Creature* New Creation*, New","title_en":"Creation*, New Creature*, New","content_ro":"<h3>NEW CREATION*, NEW CREATURE*<\/h3>\n<p>Concept of redemption developed throughout the OT and NT to its final consummation in the second coming of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The most fundamental truth of the Bible is that God is the Creator of heaven and earth, who sustains and controls everything (e.g., Gn 1; Pss 33:6-11; 104; Mt 6:25-32). The most basic consideration about men and women is that they are creatures made in God’s image (Gn 1–2). Accordingly, the Bible’s message of salvation is unintelligible apart from what it teaches about God as Creator. The true nature and perversity of humanity’s sin stem from the fact that they “worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator” (Rom 1:25, <span>niv<\/span>). God is Redeemer because he is Creator. By the same token, the objects of God’s saving activity are his rebellious creatures who, along with the entire created order, are cursed with futility and decay (Gn 3:17-18; Rom 8:20-21).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The tie between creation and salvation is especially prominent in the latter part of Isaiah (Is 40–66). The prophet surveys the grandeur of the final redemption God will accomplish for Israel. Repeatedly the perspective on this promised eschatological deliverance is that God is the Creator of heaven and earth and of Israel in particular (see also the full statement of 40:12-31; e.g., 44:24; 45:18; 48:13; 51:16; 64:8).<\/p>\n<p>In this context, expectation centers on “the new heavens and the new earth” (65:17; 66:22). This reference to the new creation gives the broadest conceivable scope to the eschatological salvation prophesied by Isaiah. God’s work of renewal and restoration at the end parallels his work of creation in the beginning (48:12). What God will do in bringing all things to their consummation is of the same order of magnitude as what he did in calling them into existence out of nothing. At the same time, the new creation concept reveals that the end-time salvation promised to Israel has universal and cosmic proportions. The underlying hope is the ultimate entrance of the faithful from among the nations, as well as in Israel, into the bliss of the eternal, new creation order. These themes from Isaiah are taken up and developed by the NT writers, and are integral to their message.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNewCreationandChrist\">The New Creation and Christ<\/p>\n<p>The NT ties together creation and redemption. Several writers either parallel or in other ways relate the saving work of Christ to his activity at creation (Jn 1:3; Col 1:15-18; Heb 1:2-3; Rv 3:14). What he has done at the end, in “the fullness of time” (Gal 4:4; Eph 1:10), “in these last days” (Heb 1:2), roots in what he did in the beginning. The redemption accomplished by Christ is a work of new creation.<\/p>\n<p>This association of the new creation with Christ’s work is unmistakable when Paul designates Christ as the “last Adam” and “second man” (1 Cor 15:45-47; cf. v 22; Rom 5:14). This description has close affinities with “Son of Man,” a self-designation of Jesus. Paul’s use of the last Adam designation is obviously intended to heighten the contrast between Adam and Christ (Rom 1; 1 Cor 15). In antithesis to Adam, who through his disobedience brought into the world sin and the consequent condemnation of death, Christ by his obedience has established righteousness, resulting in justification and life.<\/p>\n<p>Paul discloses something of the full range and implications of the Adam-Christ contrast in 1 Corinthians 15:42-49. He contrasts the believer’s present bodily existence, in its weakness and mortality, with the body to be received at the resurrection. He sums up this contrast: the one body is “natural,” the other is “spiritual.” Adam and Christ exemplify these two bodies, the natural and the spiritual. At the same time, however, Adam and Christ are brought into view as whole persons. They are the representatives of others and heads over contrasting orders of life. Adam, the first man, is representative head of the natural earthly order of existence, made subject to corruption and death by his sin (Rom 5:12-19). Christ, the second and last Adam, is the representative head over the spiritual, heavenly order, characterized by life, power, and glory. Ultimately, the contrast in this passage is between two successive world orders, creation and its consummation (new creation), each beginning with an Adam.<\/p>\n<p>Two other points also bear on the new creation gospel of Paul and the other NT writers. First, the believer’s resurrection is fully dependent on the resurrection of Christ, who, as the last Adam, became life-giving Spirit in resurrection (v 45). The controlling emphasis is on the unity between the resurrection of Christ and that of believers (cf. 1 Cor 15:12-20; Col 1:18). In the NT proclamation, the resurrection of Christ is the great redemptive counterpart to creation (Rom 4:17). According to the NT, the new creation is a present reality, dating from the resurrection of Christ. Second, in stating that the last Adam became life-giving Spirit, 1 Corinthians 15:45 points to the unity that exists between the exalted Christ and the Holy Spirit in their life-giving activity. The Holy Spirit is the power of the new creation (cf. Heb 6:5). Where the Spirit is at work as the gift of the glorified Christ, the new creation is present.<\/p>\n<p>The new creation is the eschatological fulfillment promised and anticipated in the OT. As such it has already been inaugurated and realized by the work of Christ (the last Adam), particularly by his death and resurrection, and will be consummated at his return. The interval in between receives its fundamental character from the coexistence of the two creations; the new has begun, while concurrently the old continues to pass away (1 Cor 7:31). The concept of new creation closely parallels that of the kingdom of God. According to the synoptic Gospels, it is the central theme of Jesus’ proclamation. Tied to his own person and work in its coming, the kingdom is announced by him as both present (Mt 12:28; 13:11, 16-17) and future (Mt 8:11; 25:34). In terms of the two-age distinction, coined by contemporary Judaism to express its eschatological expectations and taken over by Jesus and the early church (e.g., Mt 12:32; Eph 1:21), the new creation is the longed-for “age to come.” “New creation” serves to indicate the comprehensive nature of this eschatological reality; redemption involves nothing less than the renewal of all things (Rv 21:5).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNewCreationandtheChurch\">The New Creation and the Church<\/p>\n<p>Salvation, according to the NT, is from beginning to end a matter of union with Christ and sharing in all the benefits resulting from his once-for-all redemptive work. Accordingly, because Christ died and was raised, anyone in Christ is already a participant in the new ceation order (2 Cor 5:15). The reference is not only personal but cosmic, as seen from the context with its correlative emphasis on the reconciliation and its scope (vv 17-19).<\/p>\n<p>In the only other NT occurrence of the expression “new creation” (Gal 6:15), the perspective is cosmic as well as individual. The new creation, in which neither circumcision nor uncircumcision matters, stands in opposition to the world, to which the believer has been crucified with Christ (Gal 6:14; cf. Col 2:20). “When anyone is united to Christ, there is a new world; the old order is gone, and a new order has already begun” (2 Cor 5:17, <span>neb<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection is not only a future hope for believers but a present reality; they have already been raised with Christ (Eph 2:5-6; cf. Col 2:12-13; 3:1). Consequently, believers are “created in Christ Jesus for good works” (Eph 2:10). Further, the church is the new covenant reality of “the new man,” made up of Israel and the nations (v 15). As such, its members are already being renewed inwardly (2 Cor 4:16) by the Lord-Spirit according to the glorified image of the last Adam (2 Cor 3:18; 4:4-6; cf. Rom 8:29; Eph 4:24; Col 3:10). And they will bear this same image bodily at his return (1 Cor 15:49). The deepest motive for holy living is not gratitude for the forgiveness of sin but the determination of the believer’s existence as a new creature. The ethics of the NT are new creation ethics (Rom 12:2; Col 2:20).<\/p>\n<p>The new creation is not only a present reality but a future hope. For the new creation, too, the church lives “by faith, not by sight” (2 Cor 5:7). Reminiscent of Isaiah’s expectation, believers are looking to Christ’s return for “new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells” and where sin and its effects are nothing more than memories (2 Pt 3:13; Rv 21:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>This hope raises the question of the relationship between this final, eternal order and the original creation. The picture of destruction by burning (2 Pt 3:10-12) and some of the images in Revelation 21 and 22 (e.g., no sun, moon, night; cf. 6:12-14) seem to suggest an absolute disjunction. Other passages, however, interpret this as imagery. With all the radical differences before and after the resurrection, the natural and spiritual bodies (1 Cor 15:44) are not distinct from each other as bodies. This body, sown in corruption, dishonor, and weakness, will be raised up incorruptible, glorious, and powerful. And what holds true for the believer’s body also holds for creation. The anxious longing and groaning of the entire (nonpersonal) creation is not for annihilation but that it may be set free from bondage to futility and decay and may share in the glorious freedom of the children of God, which will be revealed in the redemption (resurrection) of the body (Rom 8:19-23). The new creation is not merely a return to conditions in the beginning but a renewed creation, the consummation of God’s purposes set from before the beginning and realized, despite man’s sin and its destructive effects, by the redemption in Christ, the last Adam. <em>See<\/em> Adam (Person); Creation; Eternal Life; Man, Old and New; New; New Heavens and New Earth.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NEW CREATION*, NEW CREATURE*<\/h3>\n<p>Concept of redemption developed throughout the OT and NT to its final consummation in the second coming of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The most fundamental truth of the Bible is that God is the Creator of heaven and earth, who sustains and controls everything (e.g., Gn 1; Pss 33:6-11; 104; Mt 6:25-32). The most basic consideration about men and women is that they are creatures made in God’s image (Gn 1–2). Accordingly, the Bible’s message of salvation is unintelligible apart from what it teaches about God as Creator. The true nature and perversity of humanity’s sin stem from the fact that they “worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator” (Rom 1:25, <span>niv<\/span>). God is Redeemer because he is Creator. By the same token, the objects of God’s saving activity are his rebellious creatures who, along with the entire created order, are cursed with futility and decay (Gn 3:17-18; Rom 8:20-21).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The tie between creation and salvation is especially prominent in the latter part of Isaiah (Is 40–66). The prophet surveys the grandeur of the final redemption God will accomplish for Israel. Repeatedly the perspective on this promised eschatological deliverance is that God is the Creator of heaven and earth and of Israel in particular (see also the full statement of 40:12-31; e.g., 44:24; 45:18; 48:13; 51:16; 64:8).<\/p>\n<p>In this context, expectation centers on “the new heavens and the new earth” (65:17; 66:22). This reference to the new creation gives the broadest conceivable scope to the eschatological salvation prophesied by Isaiah. God’s work of renewal and restoration at the end parallels his work of creation in the beginning (48:12). What God will do in bringing all things to their consummation is of the same order of magnitude as what he did in calling them into existence out of nothing. At the same time, the new creation concept reveals that the end-time salvation promised to Israel has universal and cosmic proportions. The underlying hope is the ultimate entrance of the faithful from among the nations, as well as in Israel, into the bliss of the eternal, new creation order. These themes from Isaiah are taken up and developed by the NT writers, and are integral to their message.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNewCreationandChrist\">The New Creation and Christ<\/p>\n<p>The NT ties together creation and redemption. Several writers either parallel or in other ways relate the saving work of Christ to his activity at creation (Jn 1:3; Col 1:15-18; Heb 1:2-3; Rv 3:14). What he has done at the end, in “the fullness of time” (Gal 4:4; Eph 1:10), “in these last days” (Heb 1:2), roots in what he did in the beginning. The redemption accomplished by Christ is a work of new creation.<\/p>\n<p>This association of the new creation with Christ’s work is unmistakable when Paul designates Christ as the “last Adam” and “second man” (1 Cor 15:45-47; cf. v 22; Rom 5:14). This description has close affinities with “Son of Man,” a self-designation of Jesus. Paul’s use of the last Adam designation is obviously intended to heighten the contrast between Adam and Christ (Rom 1; 1 Cor 15). In antithesis to Adam, who through his disobedience brought into the world sin and the consequent condemnation of death, Christ by his obedience has established righteousness, resulting in justification and life.<\/p>\n<p>Paul discloses something of the full range and implications of the Adam-Christ contrast in 1 Corinthians 15:42-49. He contrasts the believer’s present bodily existence, in its weakness and mortality, with the body to be received at the resurrection. He sums up this contrast: the one body is “natural,” the other is “spiritual.” Adam and Christ exemplify these two bodies, the natural and the spiritual. At the same time, however, Adam and Christ are brought into view as whole persons. They are the representatives of others and heads over contrasting orders of life. Adam, the first man, is representative head of the natural earthly order of existence, made subject to corruption and death by his sin (Rom 5:12-19). Christ, the second and last Adam, is the representative head over the spiritual, heavenly order, characterized by life, power, and glory. Ultimately, the contrast in this passage is between two successive world orders, creation and its consummation (new creation), each beginning with an Adam.<\/p>\n<p>Two other points also bear on the new creation gospel of Paul and the other NT writers. First, the believer’s resurrection is fully dependent on the resurrection of Christ, who, as the last Adam, became life-giving Spirit in resurrection (v 45). The controlling emphasis is on the unity between the resurrection of Christ and that of believers (cf. 1 Cor 15:12-20; Col 1:18). In the NT proclamation, the resurrection of Christ is the great redemptive counterpart to creation (Rom 4:17). According to the NT, the new creation is a present reality, dating from the resurrection of Christ. Second, in stating that the last Adam became life-giving Spirit, 1 Corinthians 15:45 points to the unity that exists between the exalted Christ and the Holy Spirit in their life-giving activity. The Holy Spirit is the power of the new creation (cf. Heb 6:5). Where the Spirit is at work as the gift of the glorified Christ, the new creation is present.<\/p>\n<p>The new creation is the eschatological fulfillment promised and anticipated in the OT. As such it has already been inaugurated and realized by the work of Christ (the last Adam), particularly by his death and resurrection, and will be consummated at his return. The interval in between receives its fundamental character from the coexistence of the two creations; the new has begun, while concurrently the old continues to pass away (1 Cor 7:31). The concept of new creation closely parallels that of the kingdom of God. According to the synoptic Gospels, it is the central theme of Jesus’ proclamation. Tied to his own person and work in its coming, the kingdom is announced by him as both present (Mt 12:28; 13:11, 16-17) and future (Mt 8:11; 25:34). In terms of the two-age distinction, coined by contemporary Judaism to express its eschatological expectations and taken over by Jesus and the early church (e.g., Mt 12:32; Eph 1:21), the new creation is the longed-for “age to come.” “New creation” serves to indicate the comprehensive nature of this eschatological reality; redemption involves nothing less than the renewal of all things (Rv 21:5).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNewCreationandtheChurch\">The New Creation and the Church<\/p>\n<p>Salvation, according to the NT, is from beginning to end a matter of union with Christ and sharing in all the benefits resulting from his once-for-all redemptive work. Accordingly, because Christ died and was raised, anyone in Christ is already a participant in the new ceation order (2 Cor 5:15). The reference is not only personal but cosmic, as seen from the context with its correlative emphasis on the reconciliation and its scope (vv 17-19).<\/p>\n<p>In the only other NT occurrence of the expression “new creation” (Gal 6:15), the perspective is cosmic as well as individual. The new creation, in which neither circumcision nor uncircumcision matters, stands in opposition to the world, to which the believer has been crucified with Christ (Gal 6:14; cf. Col 2:20). “When anyone is united to Christ, there is a new world; the old order is gone, and a new order has already begun” (2 Cor 5:17, <span>neb<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection is not only a future hope for believers but a present reality; they have already been raised with Christ (Eph 2:5-6; cf. Col 2:12-13; 3:1). Consequently, believers are “created in Christ Jesus for good works” (Eph 2:10). Further, the church is the new covenant reality of “the new man,” made up of Israel and the nations (v 15). As such, its members are already being renewed inwardly (2 Cor 4:16) by the Lord-Spirit according to the glorified image of the last Adam (2 Cor 3:18; 4:4-6; cf. Rom 8:29; Eph 4:24; Col 3:10). And they will bear this same image bodily at his return (1 Cor 15:49). The deepest motive for holy living is not gratitude for the forgiveness of sin but the determination of the believer’s existence as a new creature. The ethics of the NT are new creation ethics (Rom 12:2; Col 2:20).<\/p>\n<p>The new creation is not only a present reality but a future hope. For the new creation, too, the church lives “by faith, not by sight” (2 Cor 5:7). Reminiscent of Isaiah’s expectation, believers are looking to Christ’s return for “new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells” and where sin and its effects are nothing more than memories (2 Pt 3:13; Rv 21:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>This hope raises the question of the relationship between this final, eternal order and the original creation. The picture of destruction by burning (2 Pt 3:10-12) and some of the images in Revelation 21 and 22 (e.g., no sun, moon, night; cf. 6:12-14) seem to suggest an absolute disjunction. Other passages, however, interpret this as imagery. With all the radical differences before and after the resurrection, the natural and spiritual bodies (1 Cor 15:44) are not distinct from each other as bodies. This body, sown in corruption, dishonor, and weakness, will be raised up incorruptible, glorious, and powerful. And what holds true for the believer’s body also holds for creation. The anxious longing and groaning of the entire (nonpersonal) creation is not for annihilation but that it may be set free from bondage to futility and decay and may share in the glorious freedom of the children of God, which will be revealed in the redemption (resurrection) of the body (Rom 8:19-23). The new creation is not merely a return to conditions in the beginning but a renewed creation, the consummation of God’s purposes set from before the beginning and realized, despite man’s sin and its destructive effects, by the redemption in Christ, the last Adam. <em>See<\/em> Adam (Person); Creation; Eternal Life; Man, Old and New; New; New Heavens and New Earth.<\/p>","summary_ro":"NEW CREATION*, NEW CREATURE* Concept of redemption developed throughout the OT and NT to its final consummation in the second coming of Jesus Christ. The most fundamental truth of the Bible is that God is the Creator of heaven and earth, who sustains and controls everything (e.g., Gn 1; Pss 33:6-11; 104; Mt 6:25-32). The most basic consideration about men and women is that they are creatures made in God’s image (Gn 1–2). Accordingly, the Bible’s message of salvation is unintelligible apart fr...","summary_en":"NEW CREATION*, NEW CREATURE* Concept of redemption developed throughout the OT and NT to its final consummation in the second coming of Jesus Christ. The most fundamental truth of the Bible is that God is the Creator of heaven and earth, who sustains and controls everything (e.g., Gn 1; Pss 33:6-11; 104; Mt 6:25-32). The most basic consideration about men and women is that they are creatures made in God’s image (Gn 1–2). Accordingly, the Bible’s message of salvation is unintelligible apart fr...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56307,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:3","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:3","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 5\"><strong>1:3<\/strong> The <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> is God (1:1-2); all that God does, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> likewise does. Throughout his Gospel, John rightly viewed Jesus’ actions as divine activity.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 5\"><strong>1:3<\/strong> The <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> is God (1:1-2); all that God does, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> likewise does. Throughout his Gospel, John rightly viewed Jesus’ actions as divine activity.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:3 The logos is God (1:1-2); all that God does, the logos likewise does. Throughout his Gospel, John rightly viewed Jesus’ actions as divine activity.","summary_en":"1:3 The logos is God (1:1-2); all that God does, the logos likewise does. Throughout his Gospel, John rightly viewed Jesus’ actions as divine activity.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83933,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:3","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:3","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 5\"><strong>1:3<\/strong> The <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> is God (1:1-2); all that God does, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> likewise does. Throughout his Gospel, John rightly viewed Jesus’ actions as divine activity.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 5\"><strong>1:3<\/strong> The <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> is God (1:1-2); all that God does, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> likewise does. Throughout his Gospel, John rightly viewed Jesus’ actions as divine activity.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:3 The logos is God (1:1-2); all that God does, the logos likewise does. Throughout his Gospel, John rightly viewed Jesus’ actions as divine activity.","summary_en":"1:3 The logos is God (1:1-2); all that God does, the logos likewise does. Throughout his Gospel, John rightly viewed Jesus’ actions as divine activity.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111559,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:3","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:3","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 5\"><strong>1:3<\/strong> The <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> is God (1:1-2); all that God does, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> likewise does. Throughout his Gospel, John rightly viewed Jesus’ actions as divine activity.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 5\"><strong>1:3<\/strong> The <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> is God (1:1-2); all that God does, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> likewise does. Throughout his Gospel, John rightly viewed Jesus’ actions as divine activity.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:3 The logos is God (1:1-2); all that God does, the logos likewise does. Throughout his Gospel, John rightly viewed Jesus’ actions as divine activity.","summary_en":"1:3 The logos is God (1:1-2); all that God does, the logos likewise does. Throughout his Gospel, John rightly viewed Jesus’ actions as divine activity.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139185,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:3","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:3","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 5\"><strong>1:3<\/strong> The <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> is God (1:1-2); all that God does, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> likewise does. Throughout his Gospel, John rightly viewed Jesus’ actions as divine activity.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 5\"><strong>1:3<\/strong> The <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> is God (1:1-2); all that God does, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> likewise does. Throughout his Gospel, John rightly viewed Jesus’ actions as divine activity.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:3 The logos is God (1:1-2); all that God does, the logos likewise does. Throughout his Gospel, John rightly viewed Jesus’ actions as divine activity.","summary_en":"1:3 The logos is God (1:1-2); all that God does, the logos likewise does. Throughout his Gospel, John rightly viewed Jesus’ actions as divine activity.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66039,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The World","title_en":"The World","content_ro":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","summary_en":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93665,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The World","title_en":"The World","content_ro":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","summary_en":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121291,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The World","title_en":"The World","content_ro":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","summary_en":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148917,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The World","title_en":"The World","content_ro":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","summary_en":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"4":[{"id":4695,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of the Bible*, Inspiration","title_en":"of the Bible*, Inspiration","content_ro":"<h3>BIBLE*, I<span>nspiration of the<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Theological term for the influence God exerted on the writers of Scripture, enabling them to transmit his revelations in writing.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible itself tells us that it is an inspired text. It says, “All scripture is given by inspiration of God” (2 Tm 3:16, <span>kjv<\/span>). A translation closer to the original language (Greek) would be, “All Scripture is God-breathed” (<span>niv<\/span>). This tells us that every word of the Bible was breathed out from God. The words of the Bible came from God and were written by men. The apostle Peter affirmed this when he said that “no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation. For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit” (2 Pt 1:20-21, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>“Men spoke from God.” This short sentence is the key to understanding how the Bible came into being. Thousands of years ago, God chose certain men—such as Moses, David, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel—to receive his words and write them down. What they wrote became books, or sections, of the OT. Nearly 2,000 years ago, God chose other men—such as Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and Paul—to communicate his new message, the message of salvation through Jesus Christ. What they wrote became books, or sections, of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>God gave his words to these men in many different ways. Certain writers of the OT received messages directly from God. Moses was given the Ten Commandments inscribed on a stone when he was in God’s presence on Mt Sinai. When David was composing his psalms to God, he received divine inspiration to foretell certain events that would occur 1,000 years later in Jesus Christ’s life. God told his prophets—such as Isaiah and Jeremiah—exactly what to say; therefore, when they gave a message, it was God’s word, not their own. This is why many OT prophets often said, “Thus says the Lord.” (This statement appears over 2,000 times in the OT.) To other prophets, such as Ezekiel and Daniel, God communicated his message through visions and dreams. They recorded exactly what they saw, whether they understood it or not. And other OT writers, such as Samuel and Ezra, were directed by God to record events in the history of Israel.<\/p>\n\n<p>Four hundred years after the last book of the OT (Malachi) was written, God’s Son, Jesus Christ, came to earth. In his talks, he affirmed the divine authorship of the OT writings (see Mt 5:17-19; Lk 16:17; Jn 10:35). Furthermore, he often pointed to certain passages in the OT as having predicted certain events in his life (see Lk 24:27, 44). The NT writers also affirmed the divine inspiration of the OT text. It was the apostle Paul who was directed by God to write, “All Scripture is God-inspired.” Quite specifically, he was speaking of the OT. And, as was already noted, Peter said that the OT prophets were motivated by the Holy Spirit to speak from God.<\/p>\n<p>The NT is also a God-inspired book. Before Jesus left this earth and returned to his Father, he told the disciples that he would send the Holy Spirit to them. He told them that one of the functions of the Holy Spirit would be to remind them of all the things that Jesus had said and then to guide them into more truth (see Jn 14:26; 15:26; 16:13-15). Those who wrote the Gospels were helped by the Holy Spirit to remember Jesus’ exact words, and those who wrote other parts of the NT were guided by the Spirit as they wrote.<\/p>\n<p>The inspiration for writing the Gospels didn’t begin when the authors set pen to papyrus; the inspiration began when the disciples Matthew, Peter (for whom Mark wrote), and John were enlightened by their encounters with Jesus Christ, the Son of God. The apostles’ experiences with him altered their lives forever, imprinting on their souls unforgettable images of the revealed God-man, Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>This is what John was speaking of in the prologue to his Gospel when he declared, “The Word became flesh and lived among us, and we have seen his glory” (1:14, paraphrased). The “we” refers to those eyewitnesses of Jesus’ glory—the apostles who lived with Jesus for over three years. This reminiscence is expanded upon in John’s prologue to his first epistle, where he says “we have heard him, touched him, seen him, and looked upon him” (1 Jn 1:1-2, paraphrased). In both the Gospel and the Epistle, the verbs are in the perfect tense, denoting a past action with a present, abiding effect. Those past encounters with Jesus were never forgotten by John; they lived with him and stayed with him as an inspiring spirit until the day—many years later—he wrote of them in his Gospel. The same could be said for Matthew, who wrote an important Gospel, and Peter, who was really the author behind Mark’s composition. Luke was not an eyewitness, but he based his Gospel on the accounts of those who were (see Lk 1:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>The inspiration for the writing of the Epistles can also be traced to the writers’ encounters with the living Christ. The most prominent epistle writer, Paul, repeatedly claims that his inspiration and subsequent commission came from his encounter with the risen Christ (see, for example, 1 Cor 15:8-10). Peter also claims that his writings were based upon his experiences with the living Christ (see 1 Pt 5:1; 2 Pt 1:16-18). And so does John, who claims to have experienced the God-man visibly, audibly, and palpably (see 1 Jn 1:1-4). James and Jude make no such claim directly, but since they were the brothers of Jesus who became converts when they saw the risen Christ (this is certain for James—see 1 Cor 15:7—and presumed for Jude—see Acts 1:14), they too drew their inspiration from their encounters with the living Christ. Thus, all the epistle writers (with the possible exception of the one who wrote Hebrews, who is unknown) knew the living Christ. This is the relationship that qualified them to write those books that became part of the NT canon. This made them distinct from all others, no matter how good their writings were.<\/p>\n<p>The writers of the NT epistles were inspired by the Spirit when they wrote. Speaking for all the apostles, Paul indicated that the NT apostles were taught by the Holy Spirit what to say. The writers of the NT did not speak with words “taught by human wisdom,” but with “words taught by the Holy Spirit” (see 1 Cor 2:10-13). What they wrote was Spirit-taught. For example, when the apostle John saw that Jesus Christ had come to give eternal life to men, the Spirit helped him express this truth in many different ways. Thus, the reader of John’s Gospel sees different phrases about Jesus giving life: “in him was life,” “a well of living water springing up into eternal life,” “the bread of life,” “the light of life,” “the resurrection and the life,” etc. (see Jn 1:4; 4:14; 6:48; 8:12; 11:25; 14:6). When the apostle Paul contemplated the fullness of Christ’s deity, he was inspired by the Spirit to use such phrasing as “in him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily,” “in him are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge,” and “the unsearchable riches of Christ” (see Col 2:3, 9; Eph 3:8).<\/p>\n<p>As the Spirit taught the writers, they used their own vocabulary and writing style to express the thought of the Spirit. As such, the Scriptures came as the result of divine and human cooperation. The Scriptures were not mechanically inspired—as if God used the men as machines through whom he dictated the divine utterance. Rather, the Scriptures were inspired by God, then written by men. The Bible, therefore, is both fully divine and fully human.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BIBLE*, I<span>nspiration of the<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Theological term for the influence God exerted on the writers of Scripture, enabling them to transmit his revelations in writing.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible itself tells us that it is an inspired text. It says, “All scripture is given by inspiration of God” (2 Tm 3:16, <span>kjv<\/span>). A translation closer to the original language (Greek) would be, “All Scripture is God-breathed” (<span>niv<\/span>). This tells us that every word of the Bible was breathed out from God. The words of the Bible came from God and were written by men. The apostle Peter affirmed this when he said that “no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation. For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit” (2 Pt 1:20-21, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>“Men spoke from God.” This short sentence is the key to understanding how the Bible came into being. Thousands of years ago, God chose certain men—such as Moses, David, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel—to receive his words and write them down. What they wrote became books, or sections, of the OT. Nearly 2,000 years ago, God chose other men—such as Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and Paul—to communicate his new message, the message of salvation through Jesus Christ. What they wrote became books, or sections, of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>God gave his words to these men in many different ways. Certain writers of the OT received messages directly from God. Moses was given the Ten Commandments inscribed on a stone when he was in God’s presence on Mt Sinai. When David was composing his psalms to God, he received divine inspiration to foretell certain events that would occur 1,000 years later in Jesus Christ’s life. God told his prophets—such as Isaiah and Jeremiah—exactly what to say; therefore, when they gave a message, it was God’s word, not their own. This is why many OT prophets often said, “Thus says the Lord.” (This statement appears over 2,000 times in the OT.) To other prophets, such as Ezekiel and Daniel, God communicated his message through visions and dreams. They recorded exactly what they saw, whether they understood it or not. And other OT writers, such as Samuel and Ezra, were directed by God to record events in the history of Israel.<\/p>\n\n<p>Four hundred years after the last book of the OT (Malachi) was written, God’s Son, Jesus Christ, came to earth. In his talks, he affirmed the divine authorship of the OT writings (see Mt 5:17-19; Lk 16:17; Jn 10:35). Furthermore, he often pointed to certain passages in the OT as having predicted certain events in his life (see Lk 24:27, 44). The NT writers also affirmed the divine inspiration of the OT text. It was the apostle Paul who was directed by God to write, “All Scripture is God-inspired.” Quite specifically, he was speaking of the OT. And, as was already noted, Peter said that the OT prophets were motivated by the Holy Spirit to speak from God.<\/p>\n<p>The NT is also a God-inspired book. Before Jesus left this earth and returned to his Father, he told the disciples that he would send the Holy Spirit to them. He told them that one of the functions of the Holy Spirit would be to remind them of all the things that Jesus had said and then to guide them into more truth (see Jn 14:26; 15:26; 16:13-15). Those who wrote the Gospels were helped by the Holy Spirit to remember Jesus’ exact words, and those who wrote other parts of the NT were guided by the Spirit as they wrote.<\/p>\n<p>The inspiration for writing the Gospels didn’t begin when the authors set pen to papyrus; the inspiration began when the disciples Matthew, Peter (for whom Mark wrote), and John were enlightened by their encounters with Jesus Christ, the Son of God. The apostles’ experiences with him altered their lives forever, imprinting on their souls unforgettable images of the revealed God-man, Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>This is what John was speaking of in the prologue to his Gospel when he declared, “The Word became flesh and lived among us, and we have seen his glory” (1:14, paraphrased). The “we” refers to those eyewitnesses of Jesus’ glory—the apostles who lived with Jesus for over three years. This reminiscence is expanded upon in John’s prologue to his first epistle, where he says “we have heard him, touched him, seen him, and looked upon him” (1 Jn 1:1-2, paraphrased). In both the Gospel and the Epistle, the verbs are in the perfect tense, denoting a past action with a present, abiding effect. Those past encounters with Jesus were never forgotten by John; they lived with him and stayed with him as an inspiring spirit until the day—many years later—he wrote of them in his Gospel. The same could be said for Matthew, who wrote an important Gospel, and Peter, who was really the author behind Mark’s composition. Luke was not an eyewitness, but he based his Gospel on the accounts of those who were (see Lk 1:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>The inspiration for the writing of the Epistles can also be traced to the writers’ encounters with the living Christ. The most prominent epistle writer, Paul, repeatedly claims that his inspiration and subsequent commission came from his encounter with the risen Christ (see, for example, 1 Cor 15:8-10). Peter also claims that his writings were based upon his experiences with the living Christ (see 1 Pt 5:1; 2 Pt 1:16-18). And so does John, who claims to have experienced the God-man visibly, audibly, and palpably (see 1 Jn 1:1-4). James and Jude make no such claim directly, but since they were the brothers of Jesus who became converts when they saw the risen Christ (this is certain for James—see 1 Cor 15:7—and presumed for Jude—see Acts 1:14), they too drew their inspiration from their encounters with the living Christ. Thus, all the epistle writers (with the possible exception of the one who wrote Hebrews, who is unknown) knew the living Christ. This is the relationship that qualified them to write those books that became part of the NT canon. This made them distinct from all others, no matter how good their writings were.<\/p>\n<p>The writers of the NT epistles were inspired by the Spirit when they wrote. Speaking for all the apostles, Paul indicated that the NT apostles were taught by the Holy Spirit what to say. The writers of the NT did not speak with words “taught by human wisdom,” but with “words taught by the Holy Spirit” (see 1 Cor 2:10-13). What they wrote was Spirit-taught. For example, when the apostle John saw that Jesus Christ had come to give eternal life to men, the Spirit helped him express this truth in many different ways. Thus, the reader of John’s Gospel sees different phrases about Jesus giving life: “in him was life,” “a well of living water springing up into eternal life,” “the bread of life,” “the light of life,” “the resurrection and the life,” etc. (see Jn 1:4; 4:14; 6:48; 8:12; 11:25; 14:6). When the apostle Paul contemplated the fullness of Christ’s deity, he was inspired by the Spirit to use such phrasing as “in him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily,” “in him are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge,” and “the unsearchable riches of Christ” (see Col 2:3, 9; Eph 3:8).<\/p>\n<p>As the Spirit taught the writers, they used their own vocabulary and writing style to express the thought of the Spirit. As such, the Scriptures came as the result of divine and human cooperation. The Scriptures were not mechanically inspired—as if God used the men as machines through whom he dictated the divine utterance. Rather, the Scriptures were inspired by God, then written by men. The Bible, therefore, is both fully divine and fully human.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BIBLE*, Inspiration of the Theological term for the influence God exerted on the writers of Scripture, enabling them to transmit his revelations in writing. The Bible itself tells us that it is an inspired text. It says, “All scripture is given by inspiration of God” (2 Tm 3:16, kjv). A translation closer to the original language (Greek) would be, “All Scripture is God-breathed” (niv). This tells us that every word of the Bible was breathed out from God. The words of the Bible came from God a...","summary_en":"BIBLE*, Inspiration of the Theological term for the influence God exerted on the writers of Scripture, enabling them to transmit his revelations in writing. The Bible itself tells us that it is an inspired text. It says, “All scripture is given by inspiration of God” (2 Tm 3:16, kjv). A translation closer to the original language (Greek) would be, “All Scripture is God-breathed” (niv). This tells us that every word of the Bible was breathed out from God. The words of the Bible came from God a...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":17350,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Incarnation*","title_en":"Incarnation*","content_ro":"<h3>INCARNATION*<\/h3>\n<p>Literally, “in flesh”; theologically, the doctrine that in Jesus of Nazareth God took on human flesh and became the God-man. Historically, the doctrine of incarnation was central in the christological debates of patristic times and has recently come to the fore again in academic circles. Biblically, it expresses the mystery of Jesus’ identity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentTestimony\">New Testament Testimony<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Mark has no account of the Incarnation and stresses Jesus’ messiahship more than his deity. As a result, some believe that it represents an earlier stage in the development of the church’s theology, before the doctrine of incarnation had evolved. That is doubtful for two reasons: Incarnation passages like the Philippians hymn (Phil 2:6-11) probably antedate Mark’s Gospel, and Mark has a well-developed theology of the two natures of Christ. Although he stresses Jesus’ humanity, Mark accents it with an emphasis on divinity. Jesus was called the “beloved Son” by a heavenly voice at his baptism and transfiguration (Mk 1:11; 9:7); demons called him divine (3:11; 5:7), as did a Roman centurion (15:39). Jesus’ “Abba” prayers (14:36; cf. Mt 26:39; Lk 22:42) indicate his sense of divine identity, and at his trial he was charged with claiming the title “Son of the Blessed” (14:61-62). Thus, though the Incarnation is nowhere explicitly stated in Mark, it is implicitly affirmed.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew and Luke express the Incarnation. The birth narratives, of course, stress the event itself, with Matthew emphasizing Jesus’ royal messiahship, and Luke, the divine witness of the Holy Spirit. Matthew’s Gospel is Christ-centered; Luke concentrates on Christ as Savior, or more precisely, on salvation-history. Although Matthew presents Jesus’ humanity, he emphasizes his lordship (Mt 23:6-10) and divine sonship. The Incarnation thus becomes the means whereby the divine becomes human in a universal sense (1:23; 18:20; 24:14; 28:18-20). Luke shows the greatest interest of the three in Jesus’ earthly life. Nevertheless, his Gospel does not stress the human side of Jesus as much as Mark’s. Luke portrays Jesus primarily as the divine Savior within history (Lk 2:11; 4:16-30). He combines Jesus’ messianic office and divine nature, showing that the incarnate Son of God suffered and was exalted in order to bring people to God.<\/p>\n<h5>John’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>The apostle John’s doctrine of incarnation is more explicit than any of the others, teaching not only Jesus’ God-man status but also his preexistent “glory” (Jn 1:1-18). Central in this presentation is the oneness between Jesus and God the Father (10:29-30; 14:8-11; 1 Jn 2:23). The “I am” (the expressed Christ, taken from the OT title for the one true God and probably signifying God’s personal name, Yahweh) came to reveal God to his people (Jn 1:4-5, 14, 18). Yet John also has the most balanced presentation of the Incarnation. The divine Logos or Word (1:1-18) is the exemplar of perfect humanity; he “became flesh” (v 14) to enlighten people (vv 5, 9) and generate in them “eternal life” (3:14-18; 1 Jn 1:1-3; 4:9).<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Epistles<\/h5>\n<p>The apostle Paul presented the Incarnation as Jesus’ path to suffering and redemption. In Galatians 4:4-5 the Incarnation (“born of woman”) came “in the fullness of time” or at the apex of salvation-history, to “redeem those who were under the law.” In the Philippians hymn (Phil 2:6-11, quotes from <span>nasb<\/span>), the Incarnation is seen in terms of preexistence (“though he was in the form of God”), humiliation (“emptied . . . humbled”), and obedience (“becoming obedient to the point of death”). The goal of the Incarnation was the cross (“even death on a cross”), and its result was Christ’s exaltation. The hymn is perhaps the supreme theological statement on the Incarnation in the NT. Jesus’ human life was an “emptying,” a refusal to seize the prerogatives of his deity (“did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped”).<\/p>\n<p>Paul described Christ as a second Adam (Rom 5:12-19; 1 Cor 15:45-47), who brought humanity a new possibility to attain what Adam had forsaken. Through assuming the form of a man, Christ became the Redeemer who reconciles people to God (Rom 3:25; 2 Cor 5:19; 1 Tm 1:15). Paul stressed even more, however, that the exalted Christ provides newness of life (Rom 6:4-6; 2 Cor 3:17-18; Col 3:1-4). A hymn in the Letter to the Colossians (1:15-20) employs ideas from Jewish wisdom speculation, and possibly Greek themes, to show Christ as the “firstborn” and the “fullness of God.” The one who always existed as God, through his sacrificial death, became the exalted Lord and brought humankind to God (see also the “flesh-spirit” theme in Rom 1:3-4; 1 Tm 3:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Hebrews<\/h5>\n<p>The Letter to the Hebrews strongly speaks of the Incarnation. The opening hymn (Heb 1:1-3) accents Christ’s exalted status as “the very stamp” of God’s image and the radiance of his glory. Christ is superior to the angels (1:4-9), yet he became a man in order to suffer for human salvation (2:9; 5:7-9). The Incarnation is aligned with sinful humankind’s need for a Savior. The purpose of Hebrews is to show Christ’s incomparable superiority to the OT sacrifices, and at the same time to stress his work of salvation. His real temptation (2:18; 4:15) combined with his sinlessness (4:15; 5:9; 7:26) is the human remedy for human sin. The Incarnation was Christ’s path to final, once-for-all atonement and victory over sin (7:28; 9:26).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalDevelopment\">Historical Development<\/p>\n<p>The first group to challenge the traditional doctrine of incarnation was the Gnostics, who in the late first century denied that Jesus was truly human. Their Greek belief that the physical creation was evil led them to deny the Incarnation. They believed Christ to be a quasi-spiritual being who merely appeared human. The theologian Marcion (d. c. 160), trained by Gnostic teachers, also accepted a docetic interpretation of Christ (his humanity was only apparent). Marcion taught his doctrine as an antidote to the OT or Jewish-oriented Christianity in his day. After his excommunication in <span>AD<\/span> 144, Marcion founded his own church, and his views were widely disseminated in the next two centuries. Partly in reaction to Marcion’s christological heresy, the orthodox churches unified their doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>The next challenge to the orthodox view came through the Arian, Apollinarian, and Nestorian controversies in the third and fourth centuries. Arianism held that the Incarnation was total, so that Christ the Logos was no longer fully God. At the same time, he was not fully human, so Christ was someone between two natures. The Council of Nicaea (<span>AD<\/span> 325) affirmed that Jesus was indeed both God and man. A further question soon arose, however, as to the relation between his two natures. Apollinarius (310?–390?) taught that only the body of Jesus was human; his soul was absorbed completely into the divine Logos. Nestorius (c. 381–451) taught that the two natures must always remain distinct in the person of Christ; they functioned together but were separate in his being. The Council of Chalcedon (<span>AD<\/span> 451) affirmed the unity of the two natures in Jesus. Many opponents of Chalcedon arose, called Monophysites, who believed in one divine nature in Jesus, who was only in a sense human. That movement caused serious political and religious divisions, and the Council of Constantinople (680–81) reaffirmed Chalcedon and established the orthodox incarnation theology.<\/p>\n<p>In the eighth century, Spain and France were centers of the “adoptionist” controversy. Adoptionism taught that at birth Jesus was human, but at his baptism he underwent a “second birth” and was “adopted” as Son of God. It was condemned in a series of synods and never gained many adherents until modern times. During the scholastic age, Peter Lombard (1095?–1160) advocated what became known as “nihilism.” The Incarnation supposedly caused no fundamental change in Jesus’ deity, but his human nature was both insubstantial and unessential. That view likewise was condemned by Pope Alexander III (1159–81). Another debate at that time centered on the relationship between the fall and the Incarnation. Thomas Aquinas (1224–74) concluded that there was a cause-effect connection; the Incarnation was necessitated by sin rather than predestined apart from the fall.<\/p>\n<p>The Roman Catholic Church and the Protestant Reformers follow basically the same orthodox teaching about the Incarnation. The conflict in the Reformation centered more on soteriology (the doctrine of salvation). Several aberrant antitrinitarian movements took advantage of the breakdown in ecclesiastical authority, however. Michael Servetus (1511–53) taught a pantheistic view of the Incarnation, focused on the divine Spirit becoming manifest in the human form of Jesus. Thus the Logos is not a distinct person in the Godhead, nor is it fundamentally different from a “divine spark” in every person. At the same time Laelius Socinus (1525–62) and his nephew, Faustus Socinus (1539–1604), taught a unitarian system. The Incarnation was not a transferral of the divine essence but a communication of divine authority and revelation. Christ thus did not die as an atonement but as a moral example. Both Servetus and Socinianism were condemned by Catholics and Protestants alike.<\/p>\n<p>In the 17th and 18th centuries “kenoticism” (from Greek for “empty”) taught that in the Incarnation the Logos totally “emptied himself” (Phil 2:7) of the divine attributes. That doctrine represented the final phase of a dialogue from the scholastic period about the exact communication between Jesus’ two natures. Was his human nature omnipotent? If not, how did the man Jesus exercise the divine attributes? The kenotic school believed that Jesus was fully human and that his divine nature was quiescent until after the Ascension. His miraculous powers were external, given by the Spirit. Against that view, the majority of theologians argued that Jesus was at all times both God and man, and that in Philippians 2:6-8 Jesus did not lay aside the attributes of deity (he still exhibited the “form of God”) but rather the majesty associated with deity.<\/p>\n<p>The 19th and 20th centuries have given rise to a view that the Incarnation was a “myth,” a pictorial way of describing how God spoke through Jesus. The virgin birth was not historical, nor did any of the supernatural events of the Gospels ever take place. Rather, the stories in the Gospels were concoctions of the later church, efforts to portray Jesus’ impact on the movement. The Gospels, however, have too strong a flavor of accurate history for such a view to prevail (see Lk 1:1-5; Jn 19:35; 21:24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>The NT teaching on the Incarnation balances the humanity and divinity of Christ. Those two facts must harmonize in any theological system, for both are absolutely necessary parts of God’s redemptive plan. In the Incarnation, Jesus became a perfect human being. As God in human flesh, he suffered the divine penalty for sin as an innocent substitute. Being both God and man, Jesus simultaneously revealed God’s will for human life and reconciled sinful people to God through his own perfect life and death. Because of the Incarnation, therefore, those who believe in Christ have peace with God and new life from God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>INCARNATION*<\/h3>\n<p>Literally, “in flesh”; theologically, the doctrine that in Jesus of Nazareth God took on human flesh and became the God-man. Historically, the doctrine of incarnation was central in the christological debates of patristic times and has recently come to the fore again in academic circles. Biblically, it expresses the mystery of Jesus’ identity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentTestimony\">New Testament Testimony<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Mark has no account of the Incarnation and stresses Jesus’ messiahship more than his deity. As a result, some believe that it represents an earlier stage in the development of the church’s theology, before the doctrine of incarnation had evolved. That is doubtful for two reasons: Incarnation passages like the Philippians hymn (Phil 2:6-11) probably antedate Mark’s Gospel, and Mark has a well-developed theology of the two natures of Christ. Although he stresses Jesus’ humanity, Mark accents it with an emphasis on divinity. Jesus was called the “beloved Son” by a heavenly voice at his baptism and transfiguration (Mk 1:11; 9:7); demons called him divine (3:11; 5:7), as did a Roman centurion (15:39). Jesus’ “Abba” prayers (14:36; cf. Mt 26:39; Lk 22:42) indicate his sense of divine identity, and at his trial he was charged with claiming the title “Son of the Blessed” (14:61-62). Thus, though the Incarnation is nowhere explicitly stated in Mark, it is implicitly affirmed.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew and Luke express the Incarnation. The birth narratives, of course, stress the event itself, with Matthew emphasizing Jesus’ royal messiahship, and Luke, the divine witness of the Holy Spirit. Matthew’s Gospel is Christ-centered; Luke concentrates on Christ as Savior, or more precisely, on salvation-history. Although Matthew presents Jesus’ humanity, he emphasizes his lordship (Mt 23:6-10) and divine sonship. The Incarnation thus becomes the means whereby the divine becomes human in a universal sense (1:23; 18:20; 24:14; 28:18-20). Luke shows the greatest interest of the three in Jesus’ earthly life. Nevertheless, his Gospel does not stress the human side of Jesus as much as Mark’s. Luke portrays Jesus primarily as the divine Savior within history (Lk 2:11; 4:16-30). He combines Jesus’ messianic office and divine nature, showing that the incarnate Son of God suffered and was exalted in order to bring people to God.<\/p>\n<h5>John’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>The apostle John’s doctrine of incarnation is more explicit than any of the others, teaching not only Jesus’ God-man status but also his preexistent “glory” (Jn 1:1-18). Central in this presentation is the oneness between Jesus and God the Father (10:29-30; 14:8-11; 1 Jn 2:23). The “I am” (the expressed Christ, taken from the OT title for the one true God and probably signifying God’s personal name, Yahweh) came to reveal God to his people (Jn 1:4-5, 14, 18). Yet John also has the most balanced presentation of the Incarnation. The divine Logos or Word (1:1-18) is the exemplar of perfect humanity; he “became flesh” (v 14) to enlighten people (vv 5, 9) and generate in them “eternal life” (3:14-18; 1 Jn 1:1-3; 4:9).<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Epistles<\/h5>\n<p>The apostle Paul presented the Incarnation as Jesus’ path to suffering and redemption. In Galatians 4:4-5 the Incarnation (“born of woman”) came “in the fullness of time” or at the apex of salvation-history, to “redeem those who were under the law.” In the Philippians hymn (Phil 2:6-11, quotes from <span>nasb<\/span>), the Incarnation is seen in terms of preexistence (“though he was in the form of God”), humiliation (“emptied . . . humbled”), and obedience (“becoming obedient to the point of death”). The goal of the Incarnation was the cross (“even death on a cross”), and its result was Christ’s exaltation. The hymn is perhaps the supreme theological statement on the Incarnation in the NT. Jesus’ human life was an “emptying,” a refusal to seize the prerogatives of his deity (“did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped”).<\/p>\n<p>Paul described Christ as a second Adam (Rom 5:12-19; 1 Cor 15:45-47), who brought humanity a new possibility to attain what Adam had forsaken. Through assuming the form of a man, Christ became the Redeemer who reconciles people to God (Rom 3:25; 2 Cor 5:19; 1 Tm 1:15). Paul stressed even more, however, that the exalted Christ provides newness of life (Rom 6:4-6; 2 Cor 3:17-18; Col 3:1-4). A hymn in the Letter to the Colossians (1:15-20) employs ideas from Jewish wisdom speculation, and possibly Greek themes, to show Christ as the “firstborn” and the “fullness of God.” The one who always existed as God, through his sacrificial death, became the exalted Lord and brought humankind to God (see also the “flesh-spirit” theme in Rom 1:3-4; 1 Tm 3:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Hebrews<\/h5>\n<p>The Letter to the Hebrews strongly speaks of the Incarnation. The opening hymn (Heb 1:1-3) accents Christ’s exalted status as “the very stamp” of God’s image and the radiance of his glory. Christ is superior to the angels (1:4-9), yet he became a man in order to suffer for human salvation (2:9; 5:7-9). The Incarnation is aligned with sinful humankind’s need for a Savior. The purpose of Hebrews is to show Christ’s incomparable superiority to the OT sacrifices, and at the same time to stress his work of salvation. His real temptation (2:18; 4:15) combined with his sinlessness (4:15; 5:9; 7:26) is the human remedy for human sin. The Incarnation was Christ’s path to final, once-for-all atonement and victory over sin (7:28; 9:26).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalDevelopment\">Historical Development<\/p>\n<p>The first group to challenge the traditional doctrine of incarnation was the Gnostics, who in the late first century denied that Jesus was truly human. Their Greek belief that the physical creation was evil led them to deny the Incarnation. They believed Christ to be a quasi-spiritual being who merely appeared human. The theologian Marcion (d. c. 160), trained by Gnostic teachers, also accepted a docetic interpretation of Christ (his humanity was only apparent). Marcion taught his doctrine as an antidote to the OT or Jewish-oriented Christianity in his day. After his excommunication in <span>AD<\/span> 144, Marcion founded his own church, and his views were widely disseminated in the next two centuries. Partly in reaction to Marcion’s christological heresy, the orthodox churches unified their doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>The next challenge to the orthodox view came through the Arian, Apollinarian, and Nestorian controversies in the third and fourth centuries. Arianism held that the Incarnation was total, so that Christ the Logos was no longer fully God. At the same time, he was not fully human, so Christ was someone between two natures. The Council of Nicaea (<span>AD<\/span> 325) affirmed that Jesus was indeed both God and man. A further question soon arose, however, as to the relation between his two natures. Apollinarius (310?–390?) taught that only the body of Jesus was human; his soul was absorbed completely into the divine Logos. Nestorius (c. 381–451) taught that the two natures must always remain distinct in the person of Christ; they functioned together but were separate in his being. The Council of Chalcedon (<span>AD<\/span> 451) affirmed the unity of the two natures in Jesus. Many opponents of Chalcedon arose, called Monophysites, who believed in one divine nature in Jesus, who was only in a sense human. That movement caused serious political and religious divisions, and the Council of Constantinople (680–81) reaffirmed Chalcedon and established the orthodox incarnation theology.<\/p>\n<p>In the eighth century, Spain and France were centers of the “adoptionist” controversy. Adoptionism taught that at birth Jesus was human, but at his baptism he underwent a “second birth” and was “adopted” as Son of God. It was condemned in a series of synods and never gained many adherents until modern times. During the scholastic age, Peter Lombard (1095?–1160) advocated what became known as “nihilism.” The Incarnation supposedly caused no fundamental change in Jesus’ deity, but his human nature was both insubstantial and unessential. That view likewise was condemned by Pope Alexander III (1159–81). Another debate at that time centered on the relationship between the fall and the Incarnation. Thomas Aquinas (1224–74) concluded that there was a cause-effect connection; the Incarnation was necessitated by sin rather than predestined apart from the fall.<\/p>\n<p>The Roman Catholic Church and the Protestant Reformers follow basically the same orthodox teaching about the Incarnation. The conflict in the Reformation centered more on soteriology (the doctrine of salvation). Several aberrant antitrinitarian movements took advantage of the breakdown in ecclesiastical authority, however. Michael Servetus (1511–53) taught a pantheistic view of the Incarnation, focused on the divine Spirit becoming manifest in the human form of Jesus. Thus the Logos is not a distinct person in the Godhead, nor is it fundamentally different from a “divine spark” in every person. At the same time Laelius Socinus (1525–62) and his nephew, Faustus Socinus (1539–1604), taught a unitarian system. The Incarnation was not a transferral of the divine essence but a communication of divine authority and revelation. Christ thus did not die as an atonement but as a moral example. Both Servetus and Socinianism were condemned by Catholics and Protestants alike.<\/p>\n<p>In the 17th and 18th centuries “kenoticism” (from Greek for “empty”) taught that in the Incarnation the Logos totally “emptied himself” (Phil 2:7) of the divine attributes. That doctrine represented the final phase of a dialogue from the scholastic period about the exact communication between Jesus’ two natures. Was his human nature omnipotent? If not, how did the man Jesus exercise the divine attributes? The kenotic school believed that Jesus was fully human and that his divine nature was quiescent until after the Ascension. His miraculous powers were external, given by the Spirit. Against that view, the majority of theologians argued that Jesus was at all times both God and man, and that in Philippians 2:6-8 Jesus did not lay aside the attributes of deity (he still exhibited the “form of God”) but rather the majesty associated with deity.<\/p>\n<p>The 19th and 20th centuries have given rise to a view that the Incarnation was a “myth,” a pictorial way of describing how God spoke through Jesus. The virgin birth was not historical, nor did any of the supernatural events of the Gospels ever take place. Rather, the stories in the Gospels were concoctions of the later church, efforts to portray Jesus’ impact on the movement. The Gospels, however, have too strong a flavor of accurate history for such a view to prevail (see Lk 1:1-5; Jn 19:35; 21:24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>The NT teaching on the Incarnation balances the humanity and divinity of Christ. Those two facts must harmonize in any theological system, for both are absolutely necessary parts of God’s redemptive plan. In the Incarnation, Jesus became a perfect human being. As God in human flesh, he suffered the divine penalty for sin as an innocent substitute. Being both God and man, Jesus simultaneously revealed God’s will for human life and reconciled sinful people to God through his own perfect life and death. Because of the Incarnation, therefore, those who believe in Christ have peace with God and new life from God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"INCARNATION* Literally, “in flesh”; theologically, the doctrine that in Jesus of Nazareth God took on human flesh and became the God-man. Historically, the doctrine of incarnation was central in the christological debates of patristic times and has recently come to the fore again in academic circles. Biblically, it expresses the mystery of Jesus’ identity. New Testament Testimony The Synoptic Gospels The Gospel of Mark has no account of the Incarnation and stresses Jesus’ messiahship more tha...","summary_en":"INCARNATION* Literally, “in flesh”; theologically, the doctrine that in Jesus of Nazareth God took on human flesh and became the God-man. Historically, the doctrine of incarnation was central in the christological debates of patristic times and has recently come to the fore again in academic circles. Biblically, it expresses the mystery of Jesus’ identity. New Testament Testimony The Synoptic Gospels The Gospel of Mark has no account of the Incarnation and stresses Jesus’ messiahship more tha...","source":"Articles\/I.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19407,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jesus Christ","title_en":"Jesus Christ","content_ro":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","summary_en":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":23240,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Life","title_en":"Life","content_ro":"<h3>LIFE<\/h3>\n<p>In biblical perspective, life flows from the living Father through the Son (his agent in creation and redemption) into a world thirsting for “real” life (see Jn 6:57).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheLivingFather\">The Living Father<\/p>\n<p>God the Father is above all else “the living God” (Jer 10:10; Jn 5:26). God, the source of all life (1 Tm 6:13), “inbreathed” humans at creation and sustains them continually (Jb 34:14-15). God alone gives life (Gn 17:16) and takes it away (Gn 3:22-24; 6:3; Ps 104:29; Lk 12:20).<\/p>\n<p>The sign of life is movement; man is a “lively,” animated body (Mt 27:50; Lk 8:55). Animals also have this animating “breath-soul” (Hebrew of Gn 1:24; 6:17). Thus, all nature is instilled with life deriving from God (Acts 17:24-28). Life is therefore sacred, but unfortunately it is as transient as grass, clouds, dew, shadow (1 Chr 29:15; Jb 7:6, 9; Jas 4:13-16; 1 Pt 1:24). Long life is desired (Gn 35:29); any life is preferable to death and of infinite value (Eccl 9:4-6; Mt 6:25; 16:26), for Sheol houses a ghostly “nonliving life,” bereft of feeling, hope, or divine help (Ps 88:3-12). One’s life can be enhanced by loving and serving God (Dt 30:15-20; 1 Pt 3:8-12), by experiencing God’s deliverance (Is 38:16), and by receiving divine blessings (Mt 5:3-12).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChristasLife\">Christ as Life<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word for “life” is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">zoe<\/span><em>.<\/em> In classical Greek this word was used for life in general. There are a few examples of this meaning in the New Testament (see Acts 17:25; Jas 4:14: Rv 16:3), but in all other instances the word was used to designate the divine, eternal life—the life of God (Eph 4:18). This life resided in Christ, and he made it available to all who believe in him. Human beings are born with the natural life—called <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">psuche<\/span> in Greek (translated “soul,” “personality,” or “life”); they do not possess the eternal life. This life can be received only by believing in the one who possesses the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">zoe<\/span><em>-life,<\/em> namely, Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The overflowing, vibrant quality of life made available in Christ was evident in the authority of his speech and the power of his touch (Mt 9:18; Mk 1:27, 41-42; 5:27-29). He is “the author of life” (Acts 3:15), who provides the way into life (Mt 7:14; 25:46; Mk 8:35-37; 9:42-47). And he raised the dead with his life-giving power. His own resurrection made him “a life-giving spirit,” with the power of “an indestructible life” (Rom 8:2; 1 Cor 15:45; Heb 7:16). Thus, Jesus Christ is “our life” (Col 3:4)—in union with whom we find “newness of life” (Rom 6:4) and are newly created, living henceforth not for ourselves but for him (2 Cor 5:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>John, especially, dwells on the theme that Christ is the source of this new life (Jn 3:14-16; 5:21) for the children of God (1:12; 3:3, 5). This life is enjoyed already by those who know God and Christ (5:24; 17:3; 1 Jn 5:11-12), for they have already passed from death into eternal life (Jn 10:28; 11:26). Such life is abundant (10:10), enlightened (8:12), free and satisfied (10:9), victorious (Rom 6:6-14), full of peace and joy (Rom 5:1-11), inexhaustibly refreshed (Jn 4:13-14; 7:37-38) and immortal (Jn 5:24; 1 Cor 15:51-57).<\/p>\n<p>All this is possible because from the beginning “all that came to be was alive with his life” (Jn 1:4, <span>neb<\/span>). Thus, the life within the Father flows into the world through the Son, who also “has life in himself” and gives it to whom he will (5:26). He is “the resurrection and the life” (11:25; 14:6) and demonstrates it by restoring life to paralyzed limbs, raising the dead, and conquering death (5:5-9; 11:43; ch 20). People remain in death only because they will not “come” and “have life” (5:40; cf. 1 Jn 3:14).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Eternal Life.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LIFE<\/h3>\n<p>In biblical perspective, life flows from the living Father through the Son (his agent in creation and redemption) into a world thirsting for “real” life (see Jn 6:57).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheLivingFather\">The Living Father<\/p>\n<p>God the Father is above all else “the living God” (Jer 10:10; Jn 5:26). God, the source of all life (1 Tm 6:13), “inbreathed” humans at creation and sustains them continually (Jb 34:14-15). God alone gives life (Gn 17:16) and takes it away (Gn 3:22-24; 6:3; Ps 104:29; Lk 12:20).<\/p>\n<p>The sign of life is movement; man is a “lively,” animated body (Mt 27:50; Lk 8:55). Animals also have this animating “breath-soul” (Hebrew of Gn 1:24; 6:17). Thus, all nature is instilled with life deriving from God (Acts 17:24-28). Life is therefore sacred, but unfortunately it is as transient as grass, clouds, dew, shadow (1 Chr 29:15; Jb 7:6, 9; Jas 4:13-16; 1 Pt 1:24). Long life is desired (Gn 35:29); any life is preferable to death and of infinite value (Eccl 9:4-6; Mt 6:25; 16:26), for Sheol houses a ghostly “nonliving life,” bereft of feeling, hope, or divine help (Ps 88:3-12). One’s life can be enhanced by loving and serving God (Dt 30:15-20; 1 Pt 3:8-12), by experiencing God’s deliverance (Is 38:16), and by receiving divine blessings (Mt 5:3-12).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChristasLife\">Christ as Life<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word for “life” is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">zoe<\/span><em>.<\/em> In classical Greek this word was used for life in general. There are a few examples of this meaning in the New Testament (see Acts 17:25; Jas 4:14: Rv 16:3), but in all other instances the word was used to designate the divine, eternal life—the life of God (Eph 4:18). This life resided in Christ, and he made it available to all who believe in him. Human beings are born with the natural life—called <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">psuche<\/span> in Greek (translated “soul,” “personality,” or “life”); they do not possess the eternal life. This life can be received only by believing in the one who possesses the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">zoe<\/span><em>-life,<\/em> namely, Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The overflowing, vibrant quality of life made available in Christ was evident in the authority of his speech and the power of his touch (Mt 9:18; Mk 1:27, 41-42; 5:27-29). He is “the author of life” (Acts 3:15), who provides the way into life (Mt 7:14; 25:46; Mk 8:35-37; 9:42-47). And he raised the dead with his life-giving power. His own resurrection made him “a life-giving spirit,” with the power of “an indestructible life” (Rom 8:2; 1 Cor 15:45; Heb 7:16). Thus, Jesus Christ is “our life” (Col 3:4)—in union with whom we find “newness of life” (Rom 6:4) and are newly created, living henceforth not for ourselves but for him (2 Cor 5:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>John, especially, dwells on the theme that Christ is the source of this new life (Jn 3:14-16; 5:21) for the children of God (1:12; 3:3, 5). This life is enjoyed already by those who know God and Christ (5:24; 17:3; 1 Jn 5:11-12), for they have already passed from death into eternal life (Jn 10:28; 11:26). Such life is abundant (10:10), enlightened (8:12), free and satisfied (10:9), victorious (Rom 6:6-14), full of peace and joy (Rom 5:1-11), inexhaustibly refreshed (Jn 4:13-14; 7:37-38) and immortal (Jn 5:24; 1 Cor 15:51-57).<\/p>\n<p>All this is possible because from the beginning “all that came to be was alive with his life” (Jn 1:4, <span>neb<\/span>). Thus, the life within the Father flows into the world through the Son, who also “has life in himself” and gives it to whom he will (5:26). He is “the resurrection and the life” (11:25; 14:6) and demonstrates it by restoring life to paralyzed limbs, raising the dead, and conquering death (5:5-9; 11:43; ch 20). People remain in death only because they will not “come” and “have life” (5:40; cf. 1 Jn 3:14).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Eternal Life.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LIFE In biblical perspective, life flows from the living Father through the Son (his agent in creation and redemption) into a world thirsting for “real” life (see Jn 6:57). The Living Father God the Father is above all else “the living God” (Jer 10:10; Jn 5:26). God, the source of all life (1 Tm 6:13), “inbreathed” humans at creation and sustains them continually (Jb 34:14-15). God alone gives life (Gn 17:16) and takes it away (Gn 3:22-24; 6:3; Ps 104:29; Lk 12:20). The sign of life is moveme...","summary_en":"LIFE In biblical perspective, life flows from the living Father through the Son (his agent in creation and redemption) into a world thirsting for “real” life (see Jn 6:57). The Living Father God the Father is above all else “the living God” (Jer 10:10; Jn 5:26). God, the source of all life (1 Tm 6:13), “inbreathed” humans at creation and sustains them continually (Jb 34:14-15). God alone gives life (Gn 17:16) and takes it away (Gn 3:22-24; 6:3; Ps 104:29; Lk 12:20). The sign of life is moveme...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":26300,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Morning Star","title_en":"Morning Star","content_ro":"<h3>MORNING STAR<\/h3>\n<p>Literally, Venus. The phrase is closely related to the idea of the “dayspring” (Jb 38:12; Lk 1:78) and the “daystar” (2 Pt 1:19). The identity of the star is settled when Christ says, “I am the morning star” (Rv 22:16). It is another way of saying, “I am the light of the world” (Jn 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). The central concept found in the symbol is that of Christ as light shining in darkness (Lk 2:32; Jn 1:4, 7-9; 3:19; 12:35; 2 Cor 4:6; Eph 5:14; 1 Pt 2:9; 1 Jn 2:8; Rv 21:23). With the birth of the Messiah, the morning star arose—the gospel light dawned (Is 9:1-2; Mt 4:15-16). The phrase points to Christ’s glory, as the source of light, and to his grace in the sharing of life. Christ not only described himself as the morning star but also declared that he gives the morning star to those who overcome (Rv 2:28).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MORNING STAR<\/h3>\n<p>Literally, Venus. The phrase is closely related to the idea of the “dayspring” (Jb 38:12; Lk 1:78) and the “daystar” (2 Pt 1:19). The identity of the star is settled when Christ says, “I am the morning star” (Rv 22:16). It is another way of saying, “I am the light of the world” (Jn 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). The central concept found in the symbol is that of Christ as light shining in darkness (Lk 2:32; Jn 1:4, 7-9; 3:19; 12:35; 2 Cor 4:6; Eph 5:14; 1 Pt 2:9; 1 Jn 2:8; Rv 21:23). With the birth of the Messiah, the morning star arose—the gospel light dawned (Is 9:1-2; Mt 4:15-16). The phrase points to Christ’s glory, as the source of light, and to his grace in the sharing of life. Christ not only described himself as the morning star but also declared that he gives the morning star to those who overcome (Rv 2:28).<\/p>","summary_ro":"MORNING STAR Literally, Venus. The phrase is closely related to the idea of the “dayspring” (Jb 38:12; Lk 1:78) and the “daystar” (2 Pt 1:19). The identity of the star is settled when Christ says, “I am the morning star” (Rv 22:16). It is another way of saying, “I am the light of the world” (Jn 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). The central concept found in the symbol is that of Christ as light shining in darkness (Lk 2:32; Jn 1:4, 7-9; 3:19; 12:35; 2 Cor 4:6; Eph 5:14; 1 Pt 2:9; 1 Jn 2:8; Rv 21:23). With th...","summary_en":"MORNING STAR Literally, Venus. The phrase is closely related to the idea of the “dayspring” (Jb 38:12; Lk 1:78) and the “daystar” (2 Pt 1:19). The identity of the star is settled when Christ says, “I am the morning star” (Rv 22:16). It is another way of saying, “I am the light of the world” (Jn 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). The central concept found in the symbol is that of Christ as light shining in darkness (Lk 2:32; Jn 1:4, 7-9; 3:19; 12:35; 2 Cor 4:6; Eph 5:14; 1 Pt 2:9; 1 Jn 2:8; Rv 21:23). With th...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56308,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:4","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:4","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:4-5<\/strong> God created <em>light<\/em> and dispelled the <em>darkness<\/em> (Gen 1:2-5). The darkness resists God (John 3:19-21; 12:35; Matt 6:23; Acts 26:17-18; Eph 4:17-19; 5:7-14; 2 Pet 1:19; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:9-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:4-5<\/strong> God created <em>light<\/em> and dispelled the <em>darkness<\/em> (Gen 1:2-5). The darkness resists God (John 3:19-21; 12:35; Matt 6:23; Acts 26:17-18; Eph 4:17-19; 5:7-14; 2 Pet 1:19; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:9-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:4-5 God created light and dispelled the darkness (Gen 1:2-5). The darkness resists God (John 3:19-21; 12:35; Matt 6:23; Acts 26:17-18; Eph 4:17-19; 5:7-14; 2 Pet 1:19; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:9-11).","summary_en":"1:4-5 God created light and dispelled the darkness (Gen 1:2-5). The darkness resists God (John 3:19-21; 12:35; Matt 6:23; Acts 26:17-18; Eph 4:17-19; 5:7-14; 2 Pet 1:19; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:9-11).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56309,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:4","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:4","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:4<\/strong> <em>The Word gave life:<\/em> Life was God’s original gift to his creatures (Gen 1:20-28; 2:7). Now the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> would give these creatures the possibility of new life through rebirth (John 1:13). • As one of his first creative acts, God <em>brought light<\/em> (Gen 1:3). Now, in the re-creation of humanity through Jesus Christ, God offered light and life anew. Light is a key theme in John’s Gospel.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:4<\/strong> <em>The Word gave life:<\/em> Life was God’s original gift to his creatures (Gen 1:20-28; 2:7). Now the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> would give these creatures the possibility of new life through rebirth (John 1:13). • As one of his first creative acts, God <em>brought light<\/em> (Gen 1:3). Now, in the re-creation of humanity through Jesus Christ, God offered light and life anew. Light is a key theme in John’s Gospel.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:4 The Word gave life: Life was God’s original gift to his creatures (Gen 1:20-28; 2:7). Now the logos would give these creatures the possibility of new life through rebirth (John 1:13). • As one of his first creative acts, God brought light (Gen 1:3). Now, in the re-creation of humanity through Jesus Christ, God offered light and life anew. Light is a key theme in John’s Gospel.","summary_en":"1:4 The Word gave life: Life was God’s original gift to his creatures (Gen 1:20-28; 2:7). Now the logos would give these creatures the possibility of new life through rebirth (John 1:13). • As one of his first creative acts, God brought light (Gen 1:3). Now, in the re-creation of humanity through Jesus Christ, God offered light and life anew. Light is a key theme in John’s Gospel.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83934,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:4","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:4","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:4-5<\/strong> God created <em>light<\/em> and dispelled the <em>darkness<\/em> (Gen 1:2-5). The darkness resists God (John 3:19-21; 12:35; Matt 6:23; Acts 26:17-18; Eph 4:17-19; 5:7-14; 2 Pet 1:19; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:9-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:4-5<\/strong> God created <em>light<\/em> and dispelled the <em>darkness<\/em> (Gen 1:2-5). The darkness resists God (John 3:19-21; 12:35; Matt 6:23; Acts 26:17-18; Eph 4:17-19; 5:7-14; 2 Pet 1:19; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:9-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:4-5 God created light and dispelled the darkness (Gen 1:2-5). The darkness resists God (John 3:19-21; 12:35; Matt 6:23; Acts 26:17-18; Eph 4:17-19; 5:7-14; 2 Pet 1:19; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:9-11).","summary_en":"1:4-5 God created light and dispelled the darkness (Gen 1:2-5). The darkness resists God (John 3:19-21; 12:35; Matt 6:23; Acts 26:17-18; Eph 4:17-19; 5:7-14; 2 Pet 1:19; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:9-11).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83935,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:4","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:4","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:4<\/strong> <em>The Word gave life:<\/em> Life was God’s original gift to his creatures (Gen 1:20-28; 2:7). Now the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> would give these creatures the possibility of new life through rebirth (John 1:13). • As one of his first creative acts, God <em>brought light<\/em> (Gen 1:3). Now, in the re-creation of humanity through Jesus Christ, God offered light and life anew. Light is a key theme in John’s Gospel.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:4<\/strong> <em>The Word gave life:<\/em> Life was God’s original gift to his creatures (Gen 1:20-28; 2:7). Now the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> would give these creatures the possibility of new life through rebirth (John 1:13). • As one of his first creative acts, God <em>brought light<\/em> (Gen 1:3). Now, in the re-creation of humanity through Jesus Christ, God offered light and life anew. Light is a key theme in John’s Gospel.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:4 The Word gave life: Life was God’s original gift to his creatures (Gen 1:20-28; 2:7). Now the logos would give these creatures the possibility of new life through rebirth (John 1:13). • As one of his first creative acts, God brought light (Gen 1:3). Now, in the re-creation of humanity through Jesus Christ, God offered light and life anew. Light is a key theme in John’s Gospel.","summary_en":"1:4 The Word gave life: Life was God’s original gift to his creatures (Gen 1:20-28; 2:7). Now the logos would give these creatures the possibility of new life through rebirth (John 1:13). • As one of his first creative acts, God brought light (Gen 1:3). Now, in the re-creation of humanity through Jesus Christ, God offered light and life anew. Light is a key theme in John’s Gospel.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111560,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:4","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:4","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:4-5<\/strong> God created <em>light<\/em> and dispelled the <em>darkness<\/em> (Gen 1:2-5). The darkness resists God (John 3:19-21; 12:35; Matt 6:23; Acts 26:17-18; Eph 4:17-19; 5:7-14; 2 Pet 1:19; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:9-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:4-5<\/strong> God created <em>light<\/em> and dispelled the <em>darkness<\/em> (Gen 1:2-5). The darkness resists God (John 3:19-21; 12:35; Matt 6:23; Acts 26:17-18; Eph 4:17-19; 5:7-14; 2 Pet 1:19; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:9-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:4-5 God created light and dispelled the darkness (Gen 1:2-5). The darkness resists God (John 3:19-21; 12:35; Matt 6:23; Acts 26:17-18; Eph 4:17-19; 5:7-14; 2 Pet 1:19; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:9-11).","summary_en":"1:4-5 God created light and dispelled the darkness (Gen 1:2-5). The darkness resists God (John 3:19-21; 12:35; Matt 6:23; Acts 26:17-18; Eph 4:17-19; 5:7-14; 2 Pet 1:19; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:9-11).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111561,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:4","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:4","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:4<\/strong> <em>The Word gave life:<\/em> Life was God’s original gift to his creatures (Gen 1:20-28; 2:7). Now the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> would give these creatures the possibility of new life through rebirth (John 1:13). • As one of his first creative acts, God <em>brought light<\/em> (Gen 1:3). Now, in the re-creation of humanity through Jesus Christ, God offered light and life anew. Light is a key theme in John’s Gospel.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:4<\/strong> <em>The Word gave life:<\/em> Life was God’s original gift to his creatures (Gen 1:20-28; 2:7). Now the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> would give these creatures the possibility of new life through rebirth (John 1:13). • As one of his first creative acts, God <em>brought light<\/em> (Gen 1:3). Now, in the re-creation of humanity through Jesus Christ, God offered light and life anew. Light is a key theme in John’s Gospel.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:4 The Word gave life: Life was God’s original gift to his creatures (Gen 1:20-28; 2:7). Now the logos would give these creatures the possibility of new life through rebirth (John 1:13). • As one of his first creative acts, God brought light (Gen 1:3). Now, in the re-creation of humanity through Jesus Christ, God offered light and life anew. Light is a key theme in John’s Gospel.","summary_en":"1:4 The Word gave life: Life was God’s original gift to his creatures (Gen 1:20-28; 2:7). Now the logos would give these creatures the possibility of new life through rebirth (John 1:13). • As one of his first creative acts, God brought light (Gen 1:3). Now, in the re-creation of humanity through Jesus Christ, God offered light and life anew. Light is a key theme in John’s Gospel.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139186,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:4","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:4","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:4-5<\/strong> God created <em>light<\/em> and dispelled the <em>darkness<\/em> (Gen 1:2-5). The darkness resists God (John 3:19-21; 12:35; Matt 6:23; Acts 26:17-18; Eph 4:17-19; 5:7-14; 2 Pet 1:19; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:9-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:4-5<\/strong> God created <em>light<\/em> and dispelled the <em>darkness<\/em> (Gen 1:2-5). The darkness resists God (John 3:19-21; 12:35; Matt 6:23; Acts 26:17-18; Eph 4:17-19; 5:7-14; 2 Pet 1:19; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:9-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:4-5 God created light and dispelled the darkness (Gen 1:2-5). The darkness resists God (John 3:19-21; 12:35; Matt 6:23; Acts 26:17-18; Eph 4:17-19; 5:7-14; 2 Pet 1:19; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:9-11).","summary_en":"1:4-5 God created light and dispelled the darkness (Gen 1:2-5). The darkness resists God (John 3:19-21; 12:35; Matt 6:23; Acts 26:17-18; Eph 4:17-19; 5:7-14; 2 Pet 1:19; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:9-11).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139187,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:4","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:4","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:4<\/strong> <em>The Word gave life:<\/em> Life was God’s original gift to his creatures (Gen 1:20-28; 2:7). Now the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> would give these creatures the possibility of new life through rebirth (John 1:13). • As one of his first creative acts, God <em>brought light<\/em> (Gen 1:3). Now, in the re-creation of humanity through Jesus Christ, God offered light and life anew. Light is a key theme in John’s Gospel.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:4<\/strong> <em>The Word gave life:<\/em> Life was God’s original gift to his creatures (Gen 1:20-28; 2:7). Now the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> would give these creatures the possibility of new life through rebirth (John 1:13). • As one of his first creative acts, God <em>brought light<\/em> (Gen 1:3). Now, in the re-creation of humanity through Jesus Christ, God offered light and life anew. Light is a key theme in John’s Gospel.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:4 The Word gave life: Life was God’s original gift to his creatures (Gen 1:20-28; 2:7). Now the logos would give these creatures the possibility of new life through rebirth (John 1:13). • As one of his first creative acts, God brought light (Gen 1:3). Now, in the re-creation of humanity through Jesus Christ, God offered light and life anew. Light is a key theme in John’s Gospel.","summary_en":"1:4 The Word gave life: Life was God’s original gift to his creatures (Gen 1:20-28; 2:7). Now the logos would give these creatures the possibility of new life through rebirth (John 1:13). • As one of his first creative acts, God brought light (Gen 1:3). Now, in the re-creation of humanity through Jesus Christ, God offered light and life anew. Light is a key theme in John’s Gospel.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":63270,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Darkness and Light","title_en":"Darkness and Light","content_ro":"<h3>Darkness and Light<\/h3>\n<h5>Darkness<\/h5>\n<p>Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 <em>\/\/<\/em> 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sam 22:10 <em>\/\/<\/em> Ps 18:9). God is unknowable unless he reveals himself.<\/p>\n<p>Darkness often stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gen 15:12; Job 12:25; 19:8; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Isa 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>For Job, darkness was like nothingness (Job 3:4-6). It points to death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Job 10:21-22; 17:12-13; Eccl 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>Evil takes place under the cover of darkness (Job 24:16-17), but darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Ps 139:11-12; Isa 29:15-16). Darkness often depicts ignorance of God’s will: Knowledge of God is “light,” so lack of knowledge is “darkness” (Job 12:24-25; Matt 4:16; John 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11). Moral depravity is described as darkness (Prov 2:13; 4:19; Isa 5:20; 60:2). In the New Testament, darkness is also a metaphor for spiritual ignorance (Matt 4:16; 6:23; Luke 1:79; 11:35; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13). Those who come to know God come out of darkness (Isa 9:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of the Old Testament prophets was the Day of the Lord, which was often associated with darkness (Ezek 32:8; Joel 2:2, 31; Amos 5:18, 20; Zeph 1:15). The New Testament also links darkness with judgment (Matt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pet 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13).<\/p>\n<h5>Light<\/h5>\n<p>Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gen 1:3; see also 1:16). It is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting (Eccl 11:7; Jas 1:17). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led by a pillar of cloud and fire that gave them light (Exod 13:21; 14:20) and showed them the way to go (Neh 9:19). Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord (Job 12:22; 29:2-3; Pss 4:6; 18:28; 44:3; 118:27). God’s servants can extend this blessing by being a light to guide others (Isa 42:6; 49:6). God’s light also exposes sin and brings justice (see Ps 90:8; Isa 51:4).<\/p>\n<p>God himself is described as light (Ps 27:1; Isa 60:19-20; Dan 2:22; 1 Jn 1:5), and he dwells in unapproachable light (see 1 Tim 6:16). Yet he brings his servants into the light (Mic 7:8-9; see also 1 Jn 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). He brought a revelation (light) from God, but he was more than a revealer—he was himself that revelation (John 1:1-10). Those who receive Jesus, who believe in the Light, receive the right to become children of God (John 1:9-12). They are illumined by his light and come to know God and his salvation (Matt 4:16; Luke 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18). They are “children of the light” (John 12:36; 1 Thes 5:5), their allegiance is to the light (1 Jn 1:7), and their conduct is characterized by light—by “what is good and right and true” (Eph 5:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-5, 14-18; 15:12; Exod 10:21-23; 14:20; 20:21; 2 Sam 22:10-13; 1 Kgs 8:12; Job 3:3-7; 12:22-25; 15:22; 17:12-13; 34:22; Pss 18:11, 28; 27:1; 97:2-6; 139:11-12; Prov 2:13; 4:18-19; Eccl 11:7-8; Isa 5:20; 9:2; 29:15; 51:4; 60:2-3, 19-20; Dan 2:22; Mic 7:8-9; Matt 4:16; 6:22-23; 8:12; Luke 1:78-79; 2:32; John 1:4-9; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-36, 46; Acts 13:47; 26:18; Rom 2:19-20; Eph 5:7-14; 1 Thes 5:5-8; 1 Tim 6:16; Jas 1:17; 2 Pet 2:17; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:7-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Darkness and Light<\/h3>\n<h5>Darkness<\/h5>\n<p>Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 <em>\/\/<\/em> 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sam 22:10 <em>\/\/<\/em> Ps 18:9). God is unknowable unless he reveals himself.<\/p>\n<p>Darkness often stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gen 15:12; Job 12:25; 19:8; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Isa 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>For Job, darkness was like nothingness (Job 3:4-6). It points to death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Job 10:21-22; 17:12-13; Eccl 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>Evil takes place under the cover of darkness (Job 24:16-17), but darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Ps 139:11-12; Isa 29:15-16). Darkness often depicts ignorance of God’s will: Knowledge of God is “light,” so lack of knowledge is “darkness” (Job 12:24-25; Matt 4:16; John 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11). Moral depravity is described as darkness (Prov 2:13; 4:19; Isa 5:20; 60:2). In the New Testament, darkness is also a metaphor for spiritual ignorance (Matt 4:16; 6:23; Luke 1:79; 11:35; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13). Those who come to know God come out of darkness (Isa 9:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of the Old Testament prophets was the Day of the Lord, which was often associated with darkness (Ezek 32:8; Joel 2:2, 31; Amos 5:18, 20; Zeph 1:15). The New Testament also links darkness with judgment (Matt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pet 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13).<\/p>\n<h5>Light<\/h5>\n<p>Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gen 1:3; see also 1:16). It is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting (Eccl 11:7; Jas 1:17). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led by a pillar of cloud and fire that gave them light (Exod 13:21; 14:20) and showed them the way to go (Neh 9:19). Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord (Job 12:22; 29:2-3; Pss 4:6; 18:28; 44:3; 118:27). God’s servants can extend this blessing by being a light to guide others (Isa 42:6; 49:6). God’s light also exposes sin and brings justice (see Ps 90:8; Isa 51:4).<\/p>\n<p>God himself is described as light (Ps 27:1; Isa 60:19-20; Dan 2:22; 1 Jn 1:5), and he dwells in unapproachable light (see 1 Tim 6:16). Yet he brings his servants into the light (Mic 7:8-9; see also 1 Jn 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). He brought a revelation (light) from God, but he was more than a revealer—he was himself that revelation (John 1:1-10). Those who receive Jesus, who believe in the Light, receive the right to become children of God (John 1:9-12). They are illumined by his light and come to know God and his salvation (Matt 4:16; Luke 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18). They are “children of the light” (John 12:36; 1 Thes 5:5), their allegiance is to the light (1 Jn 1:7), and their conduct is characterized by light—by “what is good and right and true” (Eph 5:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-5, 14-18; 15:12; Exod 10:21-23; 14:20; 20:21; 2 Sam 22:10-13; 1 Kgs 8:12; Job 3:3-7; 12:22-25; 15:22; 17:12-13; 34:22; Pss 18:11, 28; 27:1; 97:2-6; 139:11-12; Prov 2:13; 4:18-19; Eccl 11:7-8; Isa 5:20; 9:2; 29:15; 51:4; 60:2-3, 19-20; Dan 2:22; Mic 7:8-9; Matt 4:16; 6:22-23; 8:12; Luke 1:78-79; 2:32; John 1:4-9; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-36, 46; Acts 13:47; 26:18; Rom 2:19-20; Eph 5:7-14; 1 Thes 5:5-8; 1 Tim 6:16; Jas 1:17; 2 Pet 2:17; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:7-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Darkness and Light Darkness Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23). There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 \/\/ 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sa...","summary_en":"Darkness and Light Darkness Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23). There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 \/\/ 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sa...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":90896,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Darkness and Light","title_en":"Darkness and Light","content_ro":"<h3>Darkness and Light<\/h3>\n<h5>Darkness<\/h5>\n<p>Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 <em>\/\/<\/em> 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sam 22:10 <em>\/\/<\/em> Ps 18:9). God is unknowable unless he reveals himself.<\/p>\n<p>Darkness often stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gen 15:12; Job 12:25; 19:8; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Isa 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>For Job, darkness was like nothingness (Job 3:4-6). It points to death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Job 10:21-22; 17:12-13; Eccl 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>Evil takes place under the cover of darkness (Job 24:16-17), but darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Ps 139:11-12; Isa 29:15-16). Darkness often depicts ignorance of God’s will: Knowledge of God is “light,” so lack of knowledge is “darkness” (Job 12:24-25; Matt 4:16; John 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11). Moral depravity is described as darkness (Prov 2:13; 4:19; Isa 5:20; 60:2). In the New Testament, darkness is also a metaphor for spiritual ignorance (Matt 4:16; 6:23; Luke 1:79; 11:35; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13). Those who come to know God come out of darkness (Isa 9:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of the Old Testament prophets was the Day of the Lord, which was often associated with darkness (Ezek 32:8; Joel 2:2, 31; Amos 5:18, 20; Zeph 1:15). The New Testament also links darkness with judgment (Matt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pet 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13).<\/p>\n<h5>Light<\/h5>\n<p>Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gen 1:3; see also 1:16). It is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting (Eccl 11:7; Jas 1:17). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led by a pillar of cloud and fire that gave them light (Exod 13:21; 14:20) and showed them the way to go (Neh 9:19). Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord (Job 12:22; 29:2-3; Pss 4:6; 18:28; 44:3; 118:27). God’s servants can extend this blessing by being a light to guide others (Isa 42:6; 49:6). God’s light also exposes sin and brings justice (see Ps 90:8; Isa 51:4).<\/p>\n<p>God himself is described as light (Ps 27:1; Isa 60:19-20; Dan 2:22; 1 Jn 1:5), and he dwells in unapproachable light (see 1 Tim 6:16). Yet he brings his servants into the light (Mic 7:8-9; see also 1 Jn 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). He brought a revelation (light) from God, but he was more than a revealer—he was himself that revelation (John 1:1-10). Those who receive Jesus, who believe in the Light, receive the right to become children of God (John 1:9-12). They are illumined by his light and come to know God and his salvation (Matt 4:16; Luke 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18). They are “children of the light” (John 12:36; 1 Thes 5:5), their allegiance is to the light (1 Jn 1:7), and their conduct is characterized by light—by “what is good and right and true” (Eph 5:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-5, 14-18; 15:12; Exod 10:21-23; 14:20; 20:21; 2 Sam 22:10-13; 1 Kgs 8:12; Job 3:3-7; 12:22-25; 15:22; 17:12-13; 34:22; Pss 18:11, 28; 27:1; 97:2-6; 139:11-12; Prov 2:13; 4:18-19; Eccl 11:7-8; Isa 5:20; 9:2; 29:15; 51:4; 60:2-3, 19-20; Dan 2:22; Mic 7:8-9; Matt 4:16; 6:22-23; 8:12; Luke 1:78-79; 2:32; John 1:4-9; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-36, 46; Acts 13:47; 26:18; Rom 2:19-20; Eph 5:7-14; 1 Thes 5:5-8; 1 Tim 6:16; Jas 1:17; 2 Pet 2:17; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:7-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Darkness and Light<\/h3>\n<h5>Darkness<\/h5>\n<p>Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 <em>\/\/<\/em> 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sam 22:10 <em>\/\/<\/em> Ps 18:9). God is unknowable unless he reveals himself.<\/p>\n<p>Darkness often stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gen 15:12; Job 12:25; 19:8; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Isa 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>For Job, darkness was like nothingness (Job 3:4-6). It points to death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Job 10:21-22; 17:12-13; Eccl 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>Evil takes place under the cover of darkness (Job 24:16-17), but darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Ps 139:11-12; Isa 29:15-16). Darkness often depicts ignorance of God’s will: Knowledge of God is “light,” so lack of knowledge is “darkness” (Job 12:24-25; Matt 4:16; John 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11). Moral depravity is described as darkness (Prov 2:13; 4:19; Isa 5:20; 60:2). In the New Testament, darkness is also a metaphor for spiritual ignorance (Matt 4:16; 6:23; Luke 1:79; 11:35; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13). Those who come to know God come out of darkness (Isa 9:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of the Old Testament prophets was the Day of the Lord, which was often associated with darkness (Ezek 32:8; Joel 2:2, 31; Amos 5:18, 20; Zeph 1:15). The New Testament also links darkness with judgment (Matt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pet 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13).<\/p>\n<h5>Light<\/h5>\n<p>Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gen 1:3; see also 1:16). It is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting (Eccl 11:7; Jas 1:17). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led by a pillar of cloud and fire that gave them light (Exod 13:21; 14:20) and showed them the way to go (Neh 9:19). Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord (Job 12:22; 29:2-3; Pss 4:6; 18:28; 44:3; 118:27). God’s servants can extend this blessing by being a light to guide others (Isa 42:6; 49:6). God’s light also exposes sin and brings justice (see Ps 90:8; Isa 51:4).<\/p>\n<p>God himself is described as light (Ps 27:1; Isa 60:19-20; Dan 2:22; 1 Jn 1:5), and he dwells in unapproachable light (see 1 Tim 6:16). Yet he brings his servants into the light (Mic 7:8-9; see also 1 Jn 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). He brought a revelation (light) from God, but he was more than a revealer—he was himself that revelation (John 1:1-10). Those who receive Jesus, who believe in the Light, receive the right to become children of God (John 1:9-12). They are illumined by his light and come to know God and his salvation (Matt 4:16; Luke 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18). They are “children of the light” (John 12:36; 1 Thes 5:5), their allegiance is to the light (1 Jn 1:7), and their conduct is characterized by light—by “what is good and right and true” (Eph 5:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-5, 14-18; 15:12; Exod 10:21-23; 14:20; 20:21; 2 Sam 22:10-13; 1 Kgs 8:12; Job 3:3-7; 12:22-25; 15:22; 17:12-13; 34:22; Pss 18:11, 28; 27:1; 97:2-6; 139:11-12; Prov 2:13; 4:18-19; Eccl 11:7-8; Isa 5:20; 9:2; 29:15; 51:4; 60:2-3, 19-20; Dan 2:22; Mic 7:8-9; Matt 4:16; 6:22-23; 8:12; Luke 1:78-79; 2:32; John 1:4-9; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-36, 46; Acts 13:47; 26:18; Rom 2:19-20; Eph 5:7-14; 1 Thes 5:5-8; 1 Tim 6:16; Jas 1:17; 2 Pet 2:17; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:7-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Darkness and Light Darkness Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23). There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 \/\/ 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sa...","summary_en":"Darkness and Light Darkness Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23). There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 \/\/ 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sa...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":118522,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Darkness and Light","title_en":"Darkness and Light","content_ro":"<h3>Darkness and Light<\/h3>\n<h5>Darkness<\/h5>\n<p>Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 <em>\/\/<\/em> 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sam 22:10 <em>\/\/<\/em> Ps 18:9). God is unknowable unless he reveals himself.<\/p>\n<p>Darkness often stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gen 15:12; Job 12:25; 19:8; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Isa 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>For Job, darkness was like nothingness (Job 3:4-6). It points to death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Job 10:21-22; 17:12-13; Eccl 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>Evil takes place under the cover of darkness (Job 24:16-17), but darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Ps 139:11-12; Isa 29:15-16). Darkness often depicts ignorance of God’s will: Knowledge of God is “light,” so lack of knowledge is “darkness” (Job 12:24-25; Matt 4:16; John 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11). Moral depravity is described as darkness (Prov 2:13; 4:19; Isa 5:20; 60:2). In the New Testament, darkness is also a metaphor for spiritual ignorance (Matt 4:16; 6:23; Luke 1:79; 11:35; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13). Those who come to know God come out of darkness (Isa 9:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of the Old Testament prophets was the Day of the Lord, which was often associated with darkness (Ezek 32:8; Joel 2:2, 31; Amos 5:18, 20; Zeph 1:15). The New Testament also links darkness with judgment (Matt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pet 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13).<\/p>\n<h5>Light<\/h5>\n<p>Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gen 1:3; see also 1:16). It is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting (Eccl 11:7; Jas 1:17). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led by a pillar of cloud and fire that gave them light (Exod 13:21; 14:20) and showed them the way to go (Neh 9:19). Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord (Job 12:22; 29:2-3; Pss 4:6; 18:28; 44:3; 118:27). God’s servants can extend this blessing by being a light to guide others (Isa 42:6; 49:6). God’s light also exposes sin and brings justice (see Ps 90:8; Isa 51:4).<\/p>\n<p>God himself is described as light (Ps 27:1; Isa 60:19-20; Dan 2:22; 1 Jn 1:5), and he dwells in unapproachable light (see 1 Tim 6:16). Yet he brings his servants into the light (Mic 7:8-9; see also 1 Jn 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). He brought a revelation (light) from God, but he was more than a revealer—he was himself that revelation (John 1:1-10). Those who receive Jesus, who believe in the Light, receive the right to become children of God (John 1:9-12). They are illumined by his light and come to know God and his salvation (Matt 4:16; Luke 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18). They are “children of the light” (John 12:36; 1 Thes 5:5), their allegiance is to the light (1 Jn 1:7), and their conduct is characterized by light—by “what is good and right and true” (Eph 5:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-5, 14-18; 15:12; Exod 10:21-23; 14:20; 20:21; 2 Sam 22:10-13; 1 Kgs 8:12; Job 3:3-7; 12:22-25; 15:22; 17:12-13; 34:22; Pss 18:11, 28; 27:1; 97:2-6; 139:11-12; Prov 2:13; 4:18-19; Eccl 11:7-8; Isa 5:20; 9:2; 29:15; 51:4; 60:2-3, 19-20; Dan 2:22; Mic 7:8-9; Matt 4:16; 6:22-23; 8:12; Luke 1:78-79; 2:32; John 1:4-9; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-36, 46; Acts 13:47; 26:18; Rom 2:19-20; Eph 5:7-14; 1 Thes 5:5-8; 1 Tim 6:16; Jas 1:17; 2 Pet 2:17; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:7-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Darkness and Light<\/h3>\n<h5>Darkness<\/h5>\n<p>Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 <em>\/\/<\/em> 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sam 22:10 <em>\/\/<\/em> Ps 18:9). God is unknowable unless he reveals himself.<\/p>\n<p>Darkness often stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gen 15:12; Job 12:25; 19:8; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Isa 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>For Job, darkness was like nothingness (Job 3:4-6). It points to death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Job 10:21-22; 17:12-13; Eccl 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>Evil takes place under the cover of darkness (Job 24:16-17), but darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Ps 139:11-12; Isa 29:15-16). Darkness often depicts ignorance of God’s will: Knowledge of God is “light,” so lack of knowledge is “darkness” (Job 12:24-25; Matt 4:16; John 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11). Moral depravity is described as darkness (Prov 2:13; 4:19; Isa 5:20; 60:2). In the New Testament, darkness is also a metaphor for spiritual ignorance (Matt 4:16; 6:23; Luke 1:79; 11:35; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13). Those who come to know God come out of darkness (Isa 9:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of the Old Testament prophets was the Day of the Lord, which was often associated with darkness (Ezek 32:8; Joel 2:2, 31; Amos 5:18, 20; Zeph 1:15). The New Testament also links darkness with judgment (Matt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pet 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13).<\/p>\n<h5>Light<\/h5>\n<p>Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gen 1:3; see also 1:16). It is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting (Eccl 11:7; Jas 1:17). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led by a pillar of cloud and fire that gave them light (Exod 13:21; 14:20) and showed them the way to go (Neh 9:19). Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord (Job 12:22; 29:2-3; Pss 4:6; 18:28; 44:3; 118:27). God’s servants can extend this blessing by being a light to guide others (Isa 42:6; 49:6). God’s light also exposes sin and brings justice (see Ps 90:8; Isa 51:4).<\/p>\n<p>God himself is described as light (Ps 27:1; Isa 60:19-20; Dan 2:22; 1 Jn 1:5), and he dwells in unapproachable light (see 1 Tim 6:16). Yet he brings his servants into the light (Mic 7:8-9; see also 1 Jn 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). He brought a revelation (light) from God, but he was more than a revealer—he was himself that revelation (John 1:1-10). Those who receive Jesus, who believe in the Light, receive the right to become children of God (John 1:9-12). They are illumined by his light and come to know God and his salvation (Matt 4:16; Luke 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18). They are “children of the light” (John 12:36; 1 Thes 5:5), their allegiance is to the light (1 Jn 1:7), and their conduct is characterized by light—by “what is good and right and true” (Eph 5:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-5, 14-18; 15:12; Exod 10:21-23; 14:20; 20:21; 2 Sam 22:10-13; 1 Kgs 8:12; Job 3:3-7; 12:22-25; 15:22; 17:12-13; 34:22; Pss 18:11, 28; 27:1; 97:2-6; 139:11-12; Prov 2:13; 4:18-19; Eccl 11:7-8; Isa 5:20; 9:2; 29:15; 51:4; 60:2-3, 19-20; Dan 2:22; Mic 7:8-9; Matt 4:16; 6:22-23; 8:12; Luke 1:78-79; 2:32; John 1:4-9; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-36, 46; Acts 13:47; 26:18; Rom 2:19-20; Eph 5:7-14; 1 Thes 5:5-8; 1 Tim 6:16; Jas 1:17; 2 Pet 2:17; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:7-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Darkness and Light Darkness Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23). There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 \/\/ 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sa...","summary_en":"Darkness and Light Darkness Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23). There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 \/\/ 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sa...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":146148,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Darkness and Light","title_en":"Darkness and Light","content_ro":"<h3>Darkness and Light<\/h3>\n<h5>Darkness<\/h5>\n<p>Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 <em>\/\/<\/em> 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sam 22:10 <em>\/\/<\/em> Ps 18:9). God is unknowable unless he reveals himself.<\/p>\n<p>Darkness often stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gen 15:12; Job 12:25; 19:8; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Isa 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>For Job, darkness was like nothingness (Job 3:4-6). It points to death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Job 10:21-22; 17:12-13; Eccl 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>Evil takes place under the cover of darkness (Job 24:16-17), but darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Ps 139:11-12; Isa 29:15-16). Darkness often depicts ignorance of God’s will: Knowledge of God is “light,” so lack of knowledge is “darkness” (Job 12:24-25; Matt 4:16; John 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11). Moral depravity is described as darkness (Prov 2:13; 4:19; Isa 5:20; 60:2). In the New Testament, darkness is also a metaphor for spiritual ignorance (Matt 4:16; 6:23; Luke 1:79; 11:35; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13). Those who come to know God come out of darkness (Isa 9:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of the Old Testament prophets was the Day of the Lord, which was often associated with darkness (Ezek 32:8; Joel 2:2, 31; Amos 5:18, 20; Zeph 1:15). The New Testament also links darkness with judgment (Matt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pet 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13).<\/p>\n<h5>Light<\/h5>\n<p>Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gen 1:3; see also 1:16). It is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting (Eccl 11:7; Jas 1:17). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led by a pillar of cloud and fire that gave them light (Exod 13:21; 14:20) and showed them the way to go (Neh 9:19). Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord (Job 12:22; 29:2-3; Pss 4:6; 18:28; 44:3; 118:27). God’s servants can extend this blessing by being a light to guide others (Isa 42:6; 49:6). God’s light also exposes sin and brings justice (see Ps 90:8; Isa 51:4).<\/p>\n<p>God himself is described as light (Ps 27:1; Isa 60:19-20; Dan 2:22; 1 Jn 1:5), and he dwells in unapproachable light (see 1 Tim 6:16). Yet he brings his servants into the light (Mic 7:8-9; see also 1 Jn 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). He brought a revelation (light) from God, but he was more than a revealer—he was himself that revelation (John 1:1-10). Those who receive Jesus, who believe in the Light, receive the right to become children of God (John 1:9-12). They are illumined by his light and come to know God and his salvation (Matt 4:16; Luke 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18). They are “children of the light” (John 12:36; 1 Thes 5:5), their allegiance is to the light (1 Jn 1:7), and their conduct is characterized by light—by “what is good and right and true” (Eph 5:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-5, 14-18; 15:12; Exod 10:21-23; 14:20; 20:21; 2 Sam 22:10-13; 1 Kgs 8:12; Job 3:3-7; 12:22-25; 15:22; 17:12-13; 34:22; Pss 18:11, 28; 27:1; 97:2-6; 139:11-12; Prov 2:13; 4:18-19; Eccl 11:7-8; Isa 5:20; 9:2; 29:15; 51:4; 60:2-3, 19-20; Dan 2:22; Mic 7:8-9; Matt 4:16; 6:22-23; 8:12; Luke 1:78-79; 2:32; John 1:4-9; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-36, 46; Acts 13:47; 26:18; Rom 2:19-20; Eph 5:7-14; 1 Thes 5:5-8; 1 Tim 6:16; Jas 1:17; 2 Pet 2:17; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:7-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Darkness and Light<\/h3>\n<h5>Darkness<\/h5>\n<p>Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 <em>\/\/<\/em> 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sam 22:10 <em>\/\/<\/em> Ps 18:9). God is unknowable unless he reveals himself.<\/p>\n<p>Darkness often stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gen 15:12; Job 12:25; 19:8; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Isa 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>For Job, darkness was like nothingness (Job 3:4-6). It points to death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Job 10:21-22; 17:12-13; Eccl 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>Evil takes place under the cover of darkness (Job 24:16-17), but darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Ps 139:11-12; Isa 29:15-16). Darkness often depicts ignorance of God’s will: Knowledge of God is “light,” so lack of knowledge is “darkness” (Job 12:24-25; Matt 4:16; John 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11). Moral depravity is described as darkness (Prov 2:13; 4:19; Isa 5:20; 60:2). In the New Testament, darkness is also a metaphor for spiritual ignorance (Matt 4:16; 6:23; Luke 1:79; 11:35; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13). Those who come to know God come out of darkness (Isa 9:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of the Old Testament prophets was the Day of the Lord, which was often associated with darkness (Ezek 32:8; Joel 2:2, 31; Amos 5:18, 20; Zeph 1:15). The New Testament also links darkness with judgment (Matt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pet 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13).<\/p>\n<h5>Light<\/h5>\n<p>Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gen 1:3; see also 1:16). It is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting (Eccl 11:7; Jas 1:17). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led by a pillar of cloud and fire that gave them light (Exod 13:21; 14:20) and showed them the way to go (Neh 9:19). Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord (Job 12:22; 29:2-3; Pss 4:6; 18:28; 44:3; 118:27). God’s servants can extend this blessing by being a light to guide others (Isa 42:6; 49:6). God’s light also exposes sin and brings justice (see Ps 90:8; Isa 51:4).<\/p>\n<p>God himself is described as light (Ps 27:1; Isa 60:19-20; Dan 2:22; 1 Jn 1:5), and he dwells in unapproachable light (see 1 Tim 6:16). Yet he brings his servants into the light (Mic 7:8-9; see also 1 Jn 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). He brought a revelation (light) from God, but he was more than a revealer—he was himself that revelation (John 1:1-10). Those who receive Jesus, who believe in the Light, receive the right to become children of God (John 1:9-12). They are illumined by his light and come to know God and his salvation (Matt 4:16; Luke 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18). They are “children of the light” (John 12:36; 1 Thes 5:5), their allegiance is to the light (1 Jn 1:7), and their conduct is characterized by light—by “what is good and right and true” (Eph 5:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-5, 14-18; 15:12; Exod 10:21-23; 14:20; 20:21; 2 Sam 22:10-13; 1 Kgs 8:12; Job 3:3-7; 12:22-25; 15:22; 17:12-13; 34:22; Pss 18:11, 28; 27:1; 97:2-6; 139:11-12; Prov 2:13; 4:18-19; Eccl 11:7-8; Isa 5:20; 9:2; 29:15; 51:4; 60:2-3, 19-20; Dan 2:22; Mic 7:8-9; Matt 4:16; 6:22-23; 8:12; Luke 1:78-79; 2:32; John 1:4-9; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-36, 46; Acts 13:47; 26:18; Rom 2:19-20; Eph 5:7-14; 1 Thes 5:5-8; 1 Tim 6:16; Jas 1:17; 2 Pet 2:17; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:7-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Darkness and Light Darkness Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23). There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 \/\/ 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sa...","summary_en":"Darkness and Light Darkness Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23). There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 \/\/ 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sa...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"5":[{"id":8642,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Darkness","title_en":"Darkness","content_ro":"<h3>DARKNESS<\/h3>\n<p>Absence of light or brightness. Although the Bible seldom refers to literal darkness, a number of words translated “darkness” are used in a figurative or metaphorical sense.<\/p>\n<p>When God created the world, there was no light until he commanded that light appear. He then made distinction between light and its opposite, darkness, which he called night (Gn 1:2, 4-5, 18). Literal darkness is also mentioned in the account of the plagues God inflicted on Egypt; the ninth plague was an intense darkness that could be “felt” (Ex 10:21-23). That darkness lasted three days and was selective; wherever Egyptians were, it was dark, but where the Israelites were, there was light. The Israelites left Egypt accompanied by a cloud that separated them from their enemy, evidently giving light to the Israelites but making darkness for the Egyptians (Ex 14:20). The Bible notes that thieves or adulterers are likely to do their evil deeds in the dark or at night (Jb 24:16-17).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT “darkness” is used twice in its literal sense. At the crucifixion of Jesus, for a three-hour period from noon to three o’clock, there was not light (Mt 27:45; Mk 15:33; Lk 23:44). The other reference is to Christ’s second coming, when “the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light” (Mt 24:29, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Several biblical passages speak of a darkness surrounding God, evidently moving from a literal sense of absence of light to a more profound meaning. God spoke to Moses on Mt Sinai in a dense, black cloud (Ex 20:21; Dt 4:11) or from the darkness (Dt 5:23). Darkness is pictured as a shelter or cloak around God (2 Sm 22:12; Pss 18:11; 97:2). God sets a boundary for light and darkness (Jb 26:10), brings darkness (Pss 104:20; 105:28), and creates light and darkness (Is 45:7). God dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12; 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sm 22:10; Ps 18:9).<\/p>\n<p>Most figurative references to darkness appear in poetic material, such as Job, Psalms, and Isaiah. Generally, such darkness depicts ignorance about God’s will. Knowledge of God is “light”; hence, lack of such knowledge is “darkness” (Jb 12:24-25; Mt 4:16; Jn 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11).<\/p>\n<p>Job spoke of darkness as equivalent to nothingness (Jb 3:4-6). In other references darkness stands for death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Jb 10:21-22; 15:24; 17:12-13; 18:18; Eccl 6:4; 11:8).<\/p>\n<p>Darkness frequently stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gn 15:12; Jb 5:14; 12:25; 15:22, 30; 19:8; 22:11; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Is 5:30). Moral depravity is sometimes described as darkness (Prv 2:13; 4:19; Is 5:20; 60:2). In the NT darkness is generally a metaphor of moral depravity and spiritual ignorance (Mt 4:16; 6:23; Lk 1:79; 11:35; 22:53; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of OT prophets was the Day of the Lord, often associated with darkness (Ez 32:8; Jl 2:2, 31; Am 5:18, 20; Zep 1:15). The NT also links darkness with judgment in connection with Christ’s second coming (Mt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pt 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13). Those who come to know God are said to come out of darkness (Is 9:2; 29:18; 42:7); darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Jb 34:22; Ps 139:11-12; Is 29:15).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Light.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DARKNESS<\/h3>\n<p>Absence of light or brightness. Although the Bible seldom refers to literal darkness, a number of words translated “darkness” are used in a figurative or metaphorical sense.<\/p>\n<p>When God created the world, there was no light until he commanded that light appear. He then made distinction between light and its opposite, darkness, which he called night (Gn 1:2, 4-5, 18). Literal darkness is also mentioned in the account of the plagues God inflicted on Egypt; the ninth plague was an intense darkness that could be “felt” (Ex 10:21-23). That darkness lasted three days and was selective; wherever Egyptians were, it was dark, but where the Israelites were, there was light. The Israelites left Egypt accompanied by a cloud that separated them from their enemy, evidently giving light to the Israelites but making darkness for the Egyptians (Ex 14:20). The Bible notes that thieves or adulterers are likely to do their evil deeds in the dark or at night (Jb 24:16-17).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT “darkness” is used twice in its literal sense. At the crucifixion of Jesus, for a three-hour period from noon to three o’clock, there was not light (Mt 27:45; Mk 15:33; Lk 23:44). The other reference is to Christ’s second coming, when “the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light” (Mt 24:29, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Several biblical passages speak of a darkness surrounding God, evidently moving from a literal sense of absence of light to a more profound meaning. God spoke to Moses on Mt Sinai in a dense, black cloud (Ex 20:21; Dt 4:11) or from the darkness (Dt 5:23). Darkness is pictured as a shelter or cloak around God (2 Sm 22:12; Pss 18:11; 97:2). God sets a boundary for light and darkness (Jb 26:10), brings darkness (Pss 104:20; 105:28), and creates light and darkness (Is 45:7). God dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12; 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sm 22:10; Ps 18:9).<\/p>\n<p>Most figurative references to darkness appear in poetic material, such as Job, Psalms, and Isaiah. Generally, such darkness depicts ignorance about God’s will. Knowledge of God is “light”; hence, lack of such knowledge is “darkness” (Jb 12:24-25; Mt 4:16; Jn 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11).<\/p>\n<p>Job spoke of darkness as equivalent to nothingness (Jb 3:4-6). In other references darkness stands for death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Jb 10:21-22; 15:24; 17:12-13; 18:18; Eccl 6:4; 11:8).<\/p>\n<p>Darkness frequently stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gn 15:12; Jb 5:14; 12:25; 15:22, 30; 19:8; 22:11; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Is 5:30). Moral depravity is sometimes described as darkness (Prv 2:13; 4:19; Is 5:20; 60:2). In the NT darkness is generally a metaphor of moral depravity and spiritual ignorance (Mt 4:16; 6:23; Lk 1:79; 11:35; 22:53; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of OT prophets was the Day of the Lord, often associated with darkness (Ez 32:8; Jl 2:2, 31; Am 5:18, 20; Zep 1:15). The NT also links darkness with judgment in connection with Christ’s second coming (Mt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pt 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13). Those who come to know God are said to come out of darkness (Is 9:2; 29:18; 42:7); darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Jb 34:22; Ps 139:11-12; Is 29:15).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Light.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DARKNESS Absence of light or brightness. Although the Bible seldom refers to literal darkness, a number of words translated “darkness” are used in a figurative or metaphorical sense. When God created the world, there was no light until he commanded that light appear. He then made distinction between light and its opposite, darkness, which he called night (Gn 1:2, 4-5, 18). Literal darkness is also mentioned in the account of the plagues God inflicted on Egypt; the ninth plague was an intense ...","summary_en":"DARKNESS Absence of light or brightness. Although the Bible seldom refers to literal darkness, a number of words translated “darkness” are used in a figurative or metaphorical sense. When God created the world, there was no light until he commanded that light appear. He then made distinction between light and its opposite, darkness, which he called night (Gn 1:2, 4-5, 18). Literal darkness is also mentioned in the account of the plagues God inflicted on Egypt; the ninth plague was an intense ...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":17352,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Incarnation*","title_en":"Incarnation*","content_ro":"<h3>INCARNATION*<\/h3>\n<p>Literally, “in flesh”; theologically, the doctrine that in Jesus of Nazareth God took on human flesh and became the God-man. Historically, the doctrine of incarnation was central in the christological debates of patristic times and has recently come to the fore again in academic circles. Biblically, it expresses the mystery of Jesus’ identity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentTestimony\">New Testament Testimony<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Mark has no account of the Incarnation and stresses Jesus’ messiahship more than his deity. As a result, some believe that it represents an earlier stage in the development of the church’s theology, before the doctrine of incarnation had evolved. That is doubtful for two reasons: Incarnation passages like the Philippians hymn (Phil 2:6-11) probably antedate Mark’s Gospel, and Mark has a well-developed theology of the two natures of Christ. Although he stresses Jesus’ humanity, Mark accents it with an emphasis on divinity. Jesus was called the “beloved Son” by a heavenly voice at his baptism and transfiguration (Mk 1:11; 9:7); demons called him divine (3:11; 5:7), as did a Roman centurion (15:39). Jesus’ “Abba” prayers (14:36; cf. Mt 26:39; Lk 22:42) indicate his sense of divine identity, and at his trial he was charged with claiming the title “Son of the Blessed” (14:61-62). Thus, though the Incarnation is nowhere explicitly stated in Mark, it is implicitly affirmed.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew and Luke express the Incarnation. The birth narratives, of course, stress the event itself, with Matthew emphasizing Jesus’ royal messiahship, and Luke, the divine witness of the Holy Spirit. Matthew’s Gospel is Christ-centered; Luke concentrates on Christ as Savior, or more precisely, on salvation-history. Although Matthew presents Jesus’ humanity, he emphasizes his lordship (Mt 23:6-10) and divine sonship. The Incarnation thus becomes the means whereby the divine becomes human in a universal sense (1:23; 18:20; 24:14; 28:18-20). Luke shows the greatest interest of the three in Jesus’ earthly life. Nevertheless, his Gospel does not stress the human side of Jesus as much as Mark’s. Luke portrays Jesus primarily as the divine Savior within history (Lk 2:11; 4:16-30). He combines Jesus’ messianic office and divine nature, showing that the incarnate Son of God suffered and was exalted in order to bring people to God.<\/p>\n<h5>John’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>The apostle John’s doctrine of incarnation is more explicit than any of the others, teaching not only Jesus’ God-man status but also his preexistent “glory” (Jn 1:1-18). Central in this presentation is the oneness between Jesus and God the Father (10:29-30; 14:8-11; 1 Jn 2:23). The “I am” (the expressed Christ, taken from the OT title for the one true God and probably signifying God’s personal name, Yahweh) came to reveal God to his people (Jn 1:4-5, 14, 18). Yet John also has the most balanced presentation of the Incarnation. The divine Logos or Word (1:1-18) is the exemplar of perfect humanity; he “became flesh” (v 14) to enlighten people (vv 5, 9) and generate in them “eternal life” (3:14-18; 1 Jn 1:1-3; 4:9).<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Epistles<\/h5>\n<p>The apostle Paul presented the Incarnation as Jesus’ path to suffering and redemption. In Galatians 4:4-5 the Incarnation (“born of woman”) came “in the fullness of time” or at the apex of salvation-history, to “redeem those who were under the law.” In the Philippians hymn (Phil 2:6-11, quotes from <span>nasb<\/span>), the Incarnation is seen in terms of preexistence (“though he was in the form of God”), humiliation (“emptied . . . humbled”), and obedience (“becoming obedient to the point of death”). The goal of the Incarnation was the cross (“even death on a cross”), and its result was Christ’s exaltation. The hymn is perhaps the supreme theological statement on the Incarnation in the NT. Jesus’ human life was an “emptying,” a refusal to seize the prerogatives of his deity (“did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped”).<\/p>\n<p>Paul described Christ as a second Adam (Rom 5:12-19; 1 Cor 15:45-47), who brought humanity a new possibility to attain what Adam had forsaken. Through assuming the form of a man, Christ became the Redeemer who reconciles people to God (Rom 3:25; 2 Cor 5:19; 1 Tm 1:15). Paul stressed even more, however, that the exalted Christ provides newness of life (Rom 6:4-6; 2 Cor 3:17-18; Col 3:1-4). A hymn in the Letter to the Colossians (1:15-20) employs ideas from Jewish wisdom speculation, and possibly Greek themes, to show Christ as the “firstborn” and the “fullness of God.” The one who always existed as God, through his sacrificial death, became the exalted Lord and brought humankind to God (see also the “flesh-spirit” theme in Rom 1:3-4; 1 Tm 3:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Hebrews<\/h5>\n<p>The Letter to the Hebrews strongly speaks of the Incarnation. The opening hymn (Heb 1:1-3) accents Christ’s exalted status as “the very stamp” of God’s image and the radiance of his glory. Christ is superior to the angels (1:4-9), yet he became a man in order to suffer for human salvation (2:9; 5:7-9). The Incarnation is aligned with sinful humankind’s need for a Savior. The purpose of Hebrews is to show Christ’s incomparable superiority to the OT sacrifices, and at the same time to stress his work of salvation. His real temptation (2:18; 4:15) combined with his sinlessness (4:15; 5:9; 7:26) is the human remedy for human sin. The Incarnation was Christ’s path to final, once-for-all atonement and victory over sin (7:28; 9:26).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalDevelopment\">Historical Development<\/p>\n<p>The first group to challenge the traditional doctrine of incarnation was the Gnostics, who in the late first century denied that Jesus was truly human. Their Greek belief that the physical creation was evil led them to deny the Incarnation. They believed Christ to be a quasi-spiritual being who merely appeared human. The theologian Marcion (d. c. 160), trained by Gnostic teachers, also accepted a docetic interpretation of Christ (his humanity was only apparent). Marcion taught his doctrine as an antidote to the OT or Jewish-oriented Christianity in his day. After his excommunication in <span>AD<\/span> 144, Marcion founded his own church, and his views were widely disseminated in the next two centuries. Partly in reaction to Marcion’s christological heresy, the orthodox churches unified their doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>The next challenge to the orthodox view came through the Arian, Apollinarian, and Nestorian controversies in the third and fourth centuries. Arianism held that the Incarnation was total, so that Christ the Logos was no longer fully God. At the same time, he was not fully human, so Christ was someone between two natures. The Council of Nicaea (<span>AD<\/span> 325) affirmed that Jesus was indeed both God and man. A further question soon arose, however, as to the relation between his two natures. Apollinarius (310?–390?) taught that only the body of Jesus was human; his soul was absorbed completely into the divine Logos. Nestorius (c. 381–451) taught that the two natures must always remain distinct in the person of Christ; they functioned together but were separate in his being. The Council of Chalcedon (<span>AD<\/span> 451) affirmed the unity of the two natures in Jesus. Many opponents of Chalcedon arose, called Monophysites, who believed in one divine nature in Jesus, who was only in a sense human. That movement caused serious political and religious divisions, and the Council of Constantinople (680–81) reaffirmed Chalcedon and established the orthodox incarnation theology.<\/p>\n<p>In the eighth century, Spain and France were centers of the “adoptionist” controversy. Adoptionism taught that at birth Jesus was human, but at his baptism he underwent a “second birth” and was “adopted” as Son of God. It was condemned in a series of synods and never gained many adherents until modern times. During the scholastic age, Peter Lombard (1095?–1160) advocated what became known as “nihilism.” The Incarnation supposedly caused no fundamental change in Jesus’ deity, but his human nature was both insubstantial and unessential. That view likewise was condemned by Pope Alexander III (1159–81). Another debate at that time centered on the relationship between the fall and the Incarnation. Thomas Aquinas (1224–74) concluded that there was a cause-effect connection; the Incarnation was necessitated by sin rather than predestined apart from the fall.<\/p>\n<p>The Roman Catholic Church and the Protestant Reformers follow basically the same orthodox teaching about the Incarnation. The conflict in the Reformation centered more on soteriology (the doctrine of salvation). Several aberrant antitrinitarian movements took advantage of the breakdown in ecclesiastical authority, however. Michael Servetus (1511–53) taught a pantheistic view of the Incarnation, focused on the divine Spirit becoming manifest in the human form of Jesus. Thus the Logos is not a distinct person in the Godhead, nor is it fundamentally different from a “divine spark” in every person. At the same time Laelius Socinus (1525–62) and his nephew, Faustus Socinus (1539–1604), taught a unitarian system. The Incarnation was not a transferral of the divine essence but a communication of divine authority and revelation. Christ thus did not die as an atonement but as a moral example. Both Servetus and Socinianism were condemned by Catholics and Protestants alike.<\/p>\n<p>In the 17th and 18th centuries “kenoticism” (from Greek for “empty”) taught that in the Incarnation the Logos totally “emptied himself” (Phil 2:7) of the divine attributes. That doctrine represented the final phase of a dialogue from the scholastic period about the exact communication between Jesus’ two natures. Was his human nature omnipotent? If not, how did the man Jesus exercise the divine attributes? The kenotic school believed that Jesus was fully human and that his divine nature was quiescent until after the Ascension. His miraculous powers were external, given by the Spirit. Against that view, the majority of theologians argued that Jesus was at all times both God and man, and that in Philippians 2:6-8 Jesus did not lay aside the attributes of deity (he still exhibited the “form of God”) but rather the majesty associated with deity.<\/p>\n<p>The 19th and 20th centuries have given rise to a view that the Incarnation was a “myth,” a pictorial way of describing how God spoke through Jesus. The virgin birth was not historical, nor did any of the supernatural events of the Gospels ever take place. Rather, the stories in the Gospels were concoctions of the later church, efforts to portray Jesus’ impact on the movement. The Gospels, however, have too strong a flavor of accurate history for such a view to prevail (see Lk 1:1-5; Jn 19:35; 21:24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>The NT teaching on the Incarnation balances the humanity and divinity of Christ. Those two facts must harmonize in any theological system, for both are absolutely necessary parts of God’s redemptive plan. In the Incarnation, Jesus became a perfect human being. As God in human flesh, he suffered the divine penalty for sin as an innocent substitute. Being both God and man, Jesus simultaneously revealed God’s will for human life and reconciled sinful people to God through his own perfect life and death. Because of the Incarnation, therefore, those who believe in Christ have peace with God and new life from God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>INCARNATION*<\/h3>\n<p>Literally, “in flesh”; theologically, the doctrine that in Jesus of Nazareth God took on human flesh and became the God-man. Historically, the doctrine of incarnation was central in the christological debates of patristic times and has recently come to the fore again in academic circles. Biblically, it expresses the mystery of Jesus’ identity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentTestimony\">New Testament Testimony<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Mark has no account of the Incarnation and stresses Jesus’ messiahship more than his deity. As a result, some believe that it represents an earlier stage in the development of the church’s theology, before the doctrine of incarnation had evolved. That is doubtful for two reasons: Incarnation passages like the Philippians hymn (Phil 2:6-11) probably antedate Mark’s Gospel, and Mark has a well-developed theology of the two natures of Christ. Although he stresses Jesus’ humanity, Mark accents it with an emphasis on divinity. Jesus was called the “beloved Son” by a heavenly voice at his baptism and transfiguration (Mk 1:11; 9:7); demons called him divine (3:11; 5:7), as did a Roman centurion (15:39). Jesus’ “Abba” prayers (14:36; cf. Mt 26:39; Lk 22:42) indicate his sense of divine identity, and at his trial he was charged with claiming the title “Son of the Blessed” (14:61-62). Thus, though the Incarnation is nowhere explicitly stated in Mark, it is implicitly affirmed.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew and Luke express the Incarnation. The birth narratives, of course, stress the event itself, with Matthew emphasizing Jesus’ royal messiahship, and Luke, the divine witness of the Holy Spirit. Matthew’s Gospel is Christ-centered; Luke concentrates on Christ as Savior, or more precisely, on salvation-history. Although Matthew presents Jesus’ humanity, he emphasizes his lordship (Mt 23:6-10) and divine sonship. The Incarnation thus becomes the means whereby the divine becomes human in a universal sense (1:23; 18:20; 24:14; 28:18-20). Luke shows the greatest interest of the three in Jesus’ earthly life. Nevertheless, his Gospel does not stress the human side of Jesus as much as Mark’s. Luke portrays Jesus primarily as the divine Savior within history (Lk 2:11; 4:16-30). He combines Jesus’ messianic office and divine nature, showing that the incarnate Son of God suffered and was exalted in order to bring people to God.<\/p>\n<h5>John’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>The apostle John’s doctrine of incarnation is more explicit than any of the others, teaching not only Jesus’ God-man status but also his preexistent “glory” (Jn 1:1-18). Central in this presentation is the oneness between Jesus and God the Father (10:29-30; 14:8-11; 1 Jn 2:23). The “I am” (the expressed Christ, taken from the OT title for the one true God and probably signifying God’s personal name, Yahweh) came to reveal God to his people (Jn 1:4-5, 14, 18). Yet John also has the most balanced presentation of the Incarnation. The divine Logos or Word (1:1-18) is the exemplar of perfect humanity; he “became flesh” (v 14) to enlighten people (vv 5, 9) and generate in them “eternal life” (3:14-18; 1 Jn 1:1-3; 4:9).<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Epistles<\/h5>\n<p>The apostle Paul presented the Incarnation as Jesus’ path to suffering and redemption. In Galatians 4:4-5 the Incarnation (“born of woman”) came “in the fullness of time” or at the apex of salvation-history, to “redeem those who were under the law.” In the Philippians hymn (Phil 2:6-11, quotes from <span>nasb<\/span>), the Incarnation is seen in terms of preexistence (“though he was in the form of God”), humiliation (“emptied . . . humbled”), and obedience (“becoming obedient to the point of death”). The goal of the Incarnation was the cross (“even death on a cross”), and its result was Christ’s exaltation. The hymn is perhaps the supreme theological statement on the Incarnation in the NT. Jesus’ human life was an “emptying,” a refusal to seize the prerogatives of his deity (“did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped”).<\/p>\n<p>Paul described Christ as a second Adam (Rom 5:12-19; 1 Cor 15:45-47), who brought humanity a new possibility to attain what Adam had forsaken. Through assuming the form of a man, Christ became the Redeemer who reconciles people to God (Rom 3:25; 2 Cor 5:19; 1 Tm 1:15). Paul stressed even more, however, that the exalted Christ provides newness of life (Rom 6:4-6; 2 Cor 3:17-18; Col 3:1-4). A hymn in the Letter to the Colossians (1:15-20) employs ideas from Jewish wisdom speculation, and possibly Greek themes, to show Christ as the “firstborn” and the “fullness of God.” The one who always existed as God, through his sacrificial death, became the exalted Lord and brought humankind to God (see also the “flesh-spirit” theme in Rom 1:3-4; 1 Tm 3:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Hebrews<\/h5>\n<p>The Letter to the Hebrews strongly speaks of the Incarnation. The opening hymn (Heb 1:1-3) accents Christ’s exalted status as “the very stamp” of God’s image and the radiance of his glory. Christ is superior to the angels (1:4-9), yet he became a man in order to suffer for human salvation (2:9; 5:7-9). The Incarnation is aligned with sinful humankind’s need for a Savior. The purpose of Hebrews is to show Christ’s incomparable superiority to the OT sacrifices, and at the same time to stress his work of salvation. His real temptation (2:18; 4:15) combined with his sinlessness (4:15; 5:9; 7:26) is the human remedy for human sin. The Incarnation was Christ’s path to final, once-for-all atonement and victory over sin (7:28; 9:26).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalDevelopment\">Historical Development<\/p>\n<p>The first group to challenge the traditional doctrine of incarnation was the Gnostics, who in the late first century denied that Jesus was truly human. Their Greek belief that the physical creation was evil led them to deny the Incarnation. They believed Christ to be a quasi-spiritual being who merely appeared human. The theologian Marcion (d. c. 160), trained by Gnostic teachers, also accepted a docetic interpretation of Christ (his humanity was only apparent). Marcion taught his doctrine as an antidote to the OT or Jewish-oriented Christianity in his day. After his excommunication in <span>AD<\/span> 144, Marcion founded his own church, and his views were widely disseminated in the next two centuries. Partly in reaction to Marcion’s christological heresy, the orthodox churches unified their doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>The next challenge to the orthodox view came through the Arian, Apollinarian, and Nestorian controversies in the third and fourth centuries. Arianism held that the Incarnation was total, so that Christ the Logos was no longer fully God. At the same time, he was not fully human, so Christ was someone between two natures. The Council of Nicaea (<span>AD<\/span> 325) affirmed that Jesus was indeed both God and man. A further question soon arose, however, as to the relation between his two natures. Apollinarius (310?–390?) taught that only the body of Jesus was human; his soul was absorbed completely into the divine Logos. Nestorius (c. 381–451) taught that the two natures must always remain distinct in the person of Christ; they functioned together but were separate in his being. The Council of Chalcedon (<span>AD<\/span> 451) affirmed the unity of the two natures in Jesus. Many opponents of Chalcedon arose, called Monophysites, who believed in one divine nature in Jesus, who was only in a sense human. That movement caused serious political and religious divisions, and the Council of Constantinople (680–81) reaffirmed Chalcedon and established the orthodox incarnation theology.<\/p>\n<p>In the eighth century, Spain and France were centers of the “adoptionist” controversy. Adoptionism taught that at birth Jesus was human, but at his baptism he underwent a “second birth” and was “adopted” as Son of God. It was condemned in a series of synods and never gained many adherents until modern times. During the scholastic age, Peter Lombard (1095?–1160) advocated what became known as “nihilism.” The Incarnation supposedly caused no fundamental change in Jesus’ deity, but his human nature was both insubstantial and unessential. That view likewise was condemned by Pope Alexander III (1159–81). Another debate at that time centered on the relationship between the fall and the Incarnation. Thomas Aquinas (1224–74) concluded that there was a cause-effect connection; the Incarnation was necessitated by sin rather than predestined apart from the fall.<\/p>\n<p>The Roman Catholic Church and the Protestant Reformers follow basically the same orthodox teaching about the Incarnation. The conflict in the Reformation centered more on soteriology (the doctrine of salvation). Several aberrant antitrinitarian movements took advantage of the breakdown in ecclesiastical authority, however. Michael Servetus (1511–53) taught a pantheistic view of the Incarnation, focused on the divine Spirit becoming manifest in the human form of Jesus. Thus the Logos is not a distinct person in the Godhead, nor is it fundamentally different from a “divine spark” in every person. At the same time Laelius Socinus (1525–62) and his nephew, Faustus Socinus (1539–1604), taught a unitarian system. The Incarnation was not a transferral of the divine essence but a communication of divine authority and revelation. Christ thus did not die as an atonement but as a moral example. Both Servetus and Socinianism were condemned by Catholics and Protestants alike.<\/p>\n<p>In the 17th and 18th centuries “kenoticism” (from Greek for “empty”) taught that in the Incarnation the Logos totally “emptied himself” (Phil 2:7) of the divine attributes. That doctrine represented the final phase of a dialogue from the scholastic period about the exact communication between Jesus’ two natures. Was his human nature omnipotent? If not, how did the man Jesus exercise the divine attributes? The kenotic school believed that Jesus was fully human and that his divine nature was quiescent until after the Ascension. His miraculous powers were external, given by the Spirit. Against that view, the majority of theologians argued that Jesus was at all times both God and man, and that in Philippians 2:6-8 Jesus did not lay aside the attributes of deity (he still exhibited the “form of God”) but rather the majesty associated with deity.<\/p>\n<p>The 19th and 20th centuries have given rise to a view that the Incarnation was a “myth,” a pictorial way of describing how God spoke through Jesus. The virgin birth was not historical, nor did any of the supernatural events of the Gospels ever take place. Rather, the stories in the Gospels were concoctions of the later church, efforts to portray Jesus’ impact on the movement. The Gospels, however, have too strong a flavor of accurate history for such a view to prevail (see Lk 1:1-5; Jn 19:35; 21:24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>The NT teaching on the Incarnation balances the humanity and divinity of Christ. Those two facts must harmonize in any theological system, for both are absolutely necessary parts of God’s redemptive plan. In the Incarnation, Jesus became a perfect human being. As God in human flesh, he suffered the divine penalty for sin as an innocent substitute. Being both God and man, Jesus simultaneously revealed God’s will for human life and reconciled sinful people to God through his own perfect life and death. Because of the Incarnation, therefore, those who believe in Christ have peace with God and new life from God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"INCARNATION* Literally, “in flesh”; theologically, the doctrine that in Jesus of Nazareth God took on human flesh and became the God-man. Historically, the doctrine of incarnation was central in the christological debates of patristic times and has recently come to the fore again in academic circles. Biblically, it expresses the mystery of Jesus’ identity. New Testament Testimony The Synoptic Gospels The Gospel of Mark has no account of the Incarnation and stresses Jesus’ messiahship more tha...","summary_en":"INCARNATION* Literally, “in flesh”; theologically, the doctrine that in Jesus of Nazareth God took on human flesh and became the God-man. Historically, the doctrine of incarnation was central in the christological debates of patristic times and has recently come to the fore again in academic circles. Biblically, it expresses the mystery of Jesus’ identity. New Testament Testimony The Synoptic Gospels The Gospel of Mark has no account of the Incarnation and stresses Jesus’ messiahship more tha...","source":"Articles\/I.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":23308,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Light","title_en":"Light","content_ro":"<h3>LIGHT<\/h3>\n<p>Illumination that makes sight possible.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Light is a many-sided concept in the OT. The term is often used of ordinary, sensible light, but it also speaks of communicating spiritual truth. Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gn 1:3). God also made individual lights such as the sun, moon, and stars (v 16). Sometimes light is personified, as when its inaccessibility is indicated by saying that it is impossible to reach the place where it lives (Jb 38:19; cf. v 24). There are also manufactured light sources, such as those used in the tabernacle (Ex 25:37).<\/p>\n<p>Light is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting, or what is associated with important people and more especially with God. “Light is pleasant,” says the preacher (Eccl 11:7). During one of the plagues in Egypt, the Egyptians were in thick darkness while the Israelites had light (Ex 10:23). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led in the wilderness by a pillar of cloud by day and of fire by night (13:21). The pillar gave them light when their enemies were in darkness (14:20). In later days Israel remembered that God did not abandon his people even when they sinned; the pillar of fire was always there to show them the right way (Neh 9:19; cf. Neh 9:12; Pss 78:14; 105:39).<\/p>\n<p>Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord. Job said, “He floods the darkness with light; he brings light to the deepest gloom” (Jb 12:22, <span>nlt<\/span>). In his time of trouble Job recalled earlier, better days: “I long for the years gone by when God took care of me, when he lighted the way before me and I walked safely through the darkness” (Jb 29:2-3, <span>nlt<\/span>). Similarly Eliphaz pictured the happiness that would befall Job if he would take Eliphaz’s advice: “Whatever you decide to do will be accomplished, and light will shine on the road ahead of you” (Jb 22:28, <span>nlt<\/span>). Eliphaz’s use of that expression shows what is commonly conveyed in his day. The psalmist counted it a blessing when God himself lighted his lamp (Pss 18:28; 118:27; cf. 97:11; 112:4).<\/p>\n<p>Light is closely linked with God; indeed, God can be said to be light: “No longer will you need the sun or moon to give you light, for the <span>Lord<\/span> your God will be your everlasting light, and he will be your glory. The sun will never set; the moon will not go down. For the <span>Lord<\/span> will be your everlasting light” (Is 60:19-20, <span>nlt<\/span>). The psalmist exulted, “The <span>Lord<\/span> is my light and my salvation” (Ps 27:1). God is said to be robed with light (104:2), and light dwells with him (Dn 2:22). Darkness is no problem to God; darkness and light are alike to him (Ps 139:12). Micah saw God as light and also as bringing his servants into the light (Mi 7:8-9). Both are ways of affirming that there is blessing and victory with God, so that a servant of God need never be dismayed.<\/p>\n<p>God’s blessing, described in terms of light, is also related to “the light of his presence.” Something of that expression’s meaning is seen from its use in Psalm 4:6: “Many people say, ‘Who will show us better times?’ Let the smile of your face shine on us, <span>Lord<\/span>” (<span>nlt<\/span>). The parallelism shows that “good” and the lifting up of the light of God’s countenance are much the same. Similarly, it was the light of God’s countenance that brought victory (Ps 44:3; here it is linked with God’s right hand and arm and his delight in his people). Those who walk in the light of God’s countenance are blessed (89:15). There is another side to that expression, for secret sins are exposed in his light (90:8). There is a close scrutiny from which no one and nothing can escape. But the predominant idea is that of the blessing that follows from God’s looking upon his people. On one occasion the phrase is used of a person showing favor to others (Jb 29:24). An extension of the Lord’s blessing is the light God gives to the world through his servants (Is 42:6; 49:6). God’s servants can guide others to the revelation and blessing of God.<\/p>\n<p>Light is associated with justice when the Lord says, “A law will go forth from me, and my justice for a light to the peoples” (Is 51:4, <span>rsv<\/span>). God’s light in that act of justice is a consuming fire. Sometimes light is connected with good behavior: “The path of the righteous is like the light of dawn, which shines brighter and brighter until full day” (Prv 4:18, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The OT uses the absence of light as a synonym for disaster. There are those who grope in the dark without light (Jb 12:25). Bildad saw the light of the wicked put out in punishment and death (18:5-17). The wicked will be “thrust from light into darkness” (v 18). In the aftermath of the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem there came the lament “He has brought me into deep darkness, shutting out all light” (Lam 3:2, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>New Testament references to light are often figurative. Thus, on the Damascus road, Saul of Tarsus encountered “a light from heaven” (Acts 9:3; cf. 22:6-11; 26:13). Was that light as we know it or something else? Likewise, what quality of light shone in the apostle Peter’s cell (12:7)? The light in the heavenly city is not the kind of illumination seen on earth, “for the Lord God will be their light” (Rv 22:5; cf. 21:11, 23-24).<\/p>\n<p>The association of God with light is recurrent in the NT. The apostle John wrote that “God is light and there is no darkness in him at all” (1 Jn 1:5, <span>nlt<\/span>). The apostle James referred to God as “the Father of lights” (Jas 1:17). Or God may be thought of as living in light, light that no person can approach (1 Tm 6:16; cf. 1 Jn 1:7). Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (Jn 8:12; see also 9:5), and “I have come as light into the world, that whoever believes in me may not remain in darkness” (Jn 12:46, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus told his followers to believe in the light while it was with them (v 35). Such passages emphasize that Christ brought a revelation from God, but he was more than a revealer. He was himself that revelation, according to the apostle John (Jn 1:1-10). John the Baptist came to bear witness to the light for the purpose of bringing people to believe (vv 7-8). Those who received Jesus, who believed in the light, received the right to become children of God (vv 9-12). Sometimes light is used to express the illumination that happens when people come to the knowledge of God and his salvation (Mt 4:16; Lk 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18).<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps thinking of a then-popular concept of a war between light and darkness, John wrote that the light shines in the darkness and adds that the darkness has not overcome it (Jn 1:5; cf. 1 Jn 2:8). John tells us that “the light from heaven came into the world, but they loved the darkness more than the light, for their actions were evil” (Jn 3:19, <span>nlt<\/span>). To love darkness brings condemnation, now and at the final judgment. John pointed out that evildoers keep away from the light; they do not want their evil exposed. But those who “do the truth” come to the light (vv 20-21). In John’s account of the raising of Lazarus, Jesus speaks of the possibility of walking without stumbling in the light of day, but then he goes on to the way a man stumbles in the night because he has no light (11:10). The lack of light “in” the man shows that it is a spiritual process with which Jesus is concerned and not with making physical progress by daylight. He who follows Jesus will have the light of life (8:12), which indicates what Jesus has in mind.<\/p>\n<p>Those who respond to the light may be characterized as “sons of light” (Jn 12:36). Their allegiance is to the light and their conduct has been shaped by this fact. The concept is not confined to John’s Gospel, for we also see it in Luke (Lk 16:8). We find it in Paul’s affirmation that the Thessalonian Christians are children of light and of the day, not of the night or darkness (1 Thes 5:5). John speaks of walking in the light (1 Jn 1:7) and sees the conduct of the Christian as aptly symbolized by light.<\/p>\n<p>This way of looking at the Christian’s manner of life reaches its high point in the words of Jesus to his followers: “You are the light of the world” (Mt 5:14), thus applying to them words that are also applied to himself. Of course, we are not the world’s light in the same sense as he is. When light refers to Christ, there is a reference to him as Savior and not merely as one who reveals great truths. When believers are called the light of the world, there is clearly no saving significance in the description: they do not accomplish the world’s salvation. But they do point it out. It is their function to live as redeemed people. They are to show the quality of life proper to the people of God and in this way act as light to the people of the world. They are to let their light shine before the world in such a way that people will see their good deeds and so come to praise God (not, be it noted, those who do the deeds, Mt 5:16). It is important for those in this position to make full use of the light they have. It is tragic when the light that is in them is darkness (Mt 6:23; Lk 11:35).<\/p>\n<p>This metaphor is worked out in a way not congenial to modern men and women, but the basic lesson is clear. Christians have been illuminated by the light that is Christ, who dwells within his people. If they ignore the illumination he brings and live like those in the dark, then indeed they are in deep darkness. They are worse than others because they know what light is and what it can mean to them, and have turned away from it.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Darkness.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LIGHT<\/h3>\n<p>Illumination that makes sight possible.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Light is a many-sided concept in the OT. The term is often used of ordinary, sensible light, but it also speaks of communicating spiritual truth. Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gn 1:3). God also made individual lights such as the sun, moon, and stars (v 16). Sometimes light is personified, as when its inaccessibility is indicated by saying that it is impossible to reach the place where it lives (Jb 38:19; cf. v 24). There are also manufactured light sources, such as those used in the tabernacle (Ex 25:37).<\/p>\n<p>Light is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting, or what is associated with important people and more especially with God. “Light is pleasant,” says the preacher (Eccl 11:7). During one of the plagues in Egypt, the Egyptians were in thick darkness while the Israelites had light (Ex 10:23). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led in the wilderness by a pillar of cloud by day and of fire by night (13:21). The pillar gave them light when their enemies were in darkness (14:20). In later days Israel remembered that God did not abandon his people even when they sinned; the pillar of fire was always there to show them the right way (Neh 9:19; cf. Neh 9:12; Pss 78:14; 105:39).<\/p>\n<p>Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord. Job said, “He floods the darkness with light; he brings light to the deepest gloom” (Jb 12:22, <span>nlt<\/span>). In his time of trouble Job recalled earlier, better days: “I long for the years gone by when God took care of me, when he lighted the way before me and I walked safely through the darkness” (Jb 29:2-3, <span>nlt<\/span>). Similarly Eliphaz pictured the happiness that would befall Job if he would take Eliphaz’s advice: “Whatever you decide to do will be accomplished, and light will shine on the road ahead of you” (Jb 22:28, <span>nlt<\/span>). Eliphaz’s use of that expression shows what is commonly conveyed in his day. The psalmist counted it a blessing when God himself lighted his lamp (Pss 18:28; 118:27; cf. 97:11; 112:4).<\/p>\n<p>Light is closely linked with God; indeed, God can be said to be light: “No longer will you need the sun or moon to give you light, for the <span>Lord<\/span> your God will be your everlasting light, and he will be your glory. The sun will never set; the moon will not go down. For the <span>Lord<\/span> will be your everlasting light” (Is 60:19-20, <span>nlt<\/span>). The psalmist exulted, “The <span>Lord<\/span> is my light and my salvation” (Ps 27:1). God is said to be robed with light (104:2), and light dwells with him (Dn 2:22). Darkness is no problem to God; darkness and light are alike to him (Ps 139:12). Micah saw God as light and also as bringing his servants into the light (Mi 7:8-9). Both are ways of affirming that there is blessing and victory with God, so that a servant of God need never be dismayed.<\/p>\n<p>God’s blessing, described in terms of light, is also related to “the light of his presence.” Something of that expression’s meaning is seen from its use in Psalm 4:6: “Many people say, ‘Who will show us better times?’ Let the smile of your face shine on us, <span>Lord<\/span>” (<span>nlt<\/span>). The parallelism shows that “good” and the lifting up of the light of God’s countenance are much the same. Similarly, it was the light of God’s countenance that brought victory (Ps 44:3; here it is linked with God’s right hand and arm and his delight in his people). Those who walk in the light of God’s countenance are blessed (89:15). There is another side to that expression, for secret sins are exposed in his light (90:8). There is a close scrutiny from which no one and nothing can escape. But the predominant idea is that of the blessing that follows from God’s looking upon his people. On one occasion the phrase is used of a person showing favor to others (Jb 29:24). An extension of the Lord’s blessing is the light God gives to the world through his servants (Is 42:6; 49:6). God’s servants can guide others to the revelation and blessing of God.<\/p>\n<p>Light is associated with justice when the Lord says, “A law will go forth from me, and my justice for a light to the peoples” (Is 51:4, <span>rsv<\/span>). God’s light in that act of justice is a consuming fire. Sometimes light is connected with good behavior: “The path of the righteous is like the light of dawn, which shines brighter and brighter until full day” (Prv 4:18, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The OT uses the absence of light as a synonym for disaster. There are those who grope in the dark without light (Jb 12:25). Bildad saw the light of the wicked put out in punishment and death (18:5-17). The wicked will be “thrust from light into darkness” (v 18). In the aftermath of the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem there came the lament “He has brought me into deep darkness, shutting out all light” (Lam 3:2, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>New Testament references to light are often figurative. Thus, on the Damascus road, Saul of Tarsus encountered “a light from heaven” (Acts 9:3; cf. 22:6-11; 26:13). Was that light as we know it or something else? Likewise, what quality of light shone in the apostle Peter’s cell (12:7)? The light in the heavenly city is not the kind of illumination seen on earth, “for the Lord God will be their light” (Rv 22:5; cf. 21:11, 23-24).<\/p>\n<p>The association of God with light is recurrent in the NT. The apostle John wrote that “God is light and there is no darkness in him at all” (1 Jn 1:5, <span>nlt<\/span>). The apostle James referred to God as “the Father of lights” (Jas 1:17). Or God may be thought of as living in light, light that no person can approach (1 Tm 6:16; cf. 1 Jn 1:7). Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (Jn 8:12; see also 9:5), and “I have come as light into the world, that whoever believes in me may not remain in darkness” (Jn 12:46, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus told his followers to believe in the light while it was with them (v 35). Such passages emphasize that Christ brought a revelation from God, but he was more than a revealer. He was himself that revelation, according to the apostle John (Jn 1:1-10). John the Baptist came to bear witness to the light for the purpose of bringing people to believe (vv 7-8). Those who received Jesus, who believed in the light, received the right to become children of God (vv 9-12). Sometimes light is used to express the illumination that happens when people come to the knowledge of God and his salvation (Mt 4:16; Lk 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18).<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps thinking of a then-popular concept of a war between light and darkness, John wrote that the light shines in the darkness and adds that the darkness has not overcome it (Jn 1:5; cf. 1 Jn 2:8). John tells us that “the light from heaven came into the world, but they loved the darkness more than the light, for their actions were evil” (Jn 3:19, <span>nlt<\/span>). To love darkness brings condemnation, now and at the final judgment. John pointed out that evildoers keep away from the light; they do not want their evil exposed. But those who “do the truth” come to the light (vv 20-21). In John’s account of the raising of Lazarus, Jesus speaks of the possibility of walking without stumbling in the light of day, but then he goes on to the way a man stumbles in the night because he has no light (11:10). The lack of light “in” the man shows that it is a spiritual process with which Jesus is concerned and not with making physical progress by daylight. He who follows Jesus will have the light of life (8:12), which indicates what Jesus has in mind.<\/p>\n<p>Those who respond to the light may be characterized as “sons of light” (Jn 12:36). Their allegiance is to the light and their conduct has been shaped by this fact. The concept is not confined to John’s Gospel, for we also see it in Luke (Lk 16:8). We find it in Paul’s affirmation that the Thessalonian Christians are children of light and of the day, not of the night or darkness (1 Thes 5:5). John speaks of walking in the light (1 Jn 1:7) and sees the conduct of the Christian as aptly symbolized by light.<\/p>\n<p>This way of looking at the Christian’s manner of life reaches its high point in the words of Jesus to his followers: “You are the light of the world” (Mt 5:14), thus applying to them words that are also applied to himself. Of course, we are not the world’s light in the same sense as he is. When light refers to Christ, there is a reference to him as Savior and not merely as one who reveals great truths. When believers are called the light of the world, there is clearly no saving significance in the description: they do not accomplish the world’s salvation. But they do point it out. It is their function to live as redeemed people. They are to show the quality of life proper to the people of God and in this way act as light to the people of the world. They are to let their light shine before the world in such a way that people will see their good deeds and so come to praise God (not, be it noted, those who do the deeds, Mt 5:16). It is important for those in this position to make full use of the light they have. It is tragic when the light that is in them is darkness (Mt 6:23; Lk 11:35).<\/p>\n<p>This metaphor is worked out in a way not congenial to modern men and women, but the basic lesson is clear. Christians have been illuminated by the light that is Christ, who dwells within his people. If they ignore the illumination he brings and live like those in the dark, then indeed they are in deep darkness. They are worse than others because they know what light is and what it can mean to them, and have turned away from it.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Darkness.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LIGHT Illumination that makes sight possible. In the Old Testament Light is a many-sided concept in the OT. The term is often used of ordinary, sensible light, but it also speaks of communicating spiritual truth. Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gn 1:3). God also made individual lights such as the sun, moon, and stars (v 16). Sometimes light is personified, as when its inaccessibility is indicated by saying that it is impossible to reach the place where it li...","summary_en":"LIGHT Illumination that makes sight possible. In the Old Testament Light is a many-sided concept in the OT. The term is often used of ordinary, sensible light, but it also speaks of communicating spiritual truth. Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gn 1:3). God also made individual lights such as the sun, moon, and stars (v 16). Sometimes light is personified, as when its inaccessibility is indicated by saying that it is impossible to reach the place where it li...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56310,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:5","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:5","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:5<\/strong> <em>the darkness can never extinguish it:<\/em> Or <em>the darkness has not understood it;<\/em> literally <em>the darkness cannot grasp it.<\/em> The Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">katalambanō<\/span> (“grasp”) can mean either “understand” or “be hostile”; in John’s Gospel, it means hostility. The darkness would try to destroy Jesus (the light), but it would fail. The light would successfully bring salvation to the world.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:5<\/strong> <em>the darkness can never extinguish it:<\/em> Or <em>the darkness has not understood it;<\/em> literally <em>the darkness cannot grasp it.<\/em> The Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">katalambanō<\/span> (“grasp”) can mean either “understand” or “be hostile”; in John’s Gospel, it means hostility. The darkness would try to destroy Jesus (the light), but it would fail. The light would successfully bring salvation to the world.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:5 the darkness can never extinguish it: Or the darkness has not understood it; literally the darkness cannot grasp it. The Greek word katalambanō (“grasp”) can mean either “understand” or “be hostile”; in John’s Gospel, it means hostility. The darkness would try to destroy Jesus (the light), but it would fail. The light would successfully bring salvation to the world.","summary_en":"1:5 the darkness can never extinguish it: Or the darkness has not understood it; literally the darkness cannot grasp it. The Greek word katalambanō (“grasp”) can mean either “understand” or “be hostile”; in John’s Gospel, it means hostility. The darkness would try to destroy Jesus (the light), but it would fail. The light would successfully bring salvation to the world.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83936,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:5","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:5","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:5<\/strong> <em>the darkness can never extinguish it:<\/em> Or <em>the darkness has not understood it;<\/em> literally <em>the darkness cannot grasp it.<\/em> The Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">katalambanō<\/span> (“grasp”) can mean either “understand” or “be hostile”; in John’s Gospel, it means hostility. The darkness would try to destroy Jesus (the light), but it would fail. The light would successfully bring salvation to the world.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:5<\/strong> <em>the darkness can never extinguish it:<\/em> Or <em>the darkness has not understood it;<\/em> literally <em>the darkness cannot grasp it.<\/em> The Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">katalambanō<\/span> (“grasp”) can mean either “understand” or “be hostile”; in John’s Gospel, it means hostility. The darkness would try to destroy Jesus (the light), but it would fail. The light would successfully bring salvation to the world.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:5 the darkness can never extinguish it: Or the darkness has not understood it; literally the darkness cannot grasp it. The Greek word katalambanō (“grasp”) can mean either “understand” or “be hostile”; in John’s Gospel, it means hostility. The darkness would try to destroy Jesus (the light), but it would fail. The light would successfully bring salvation to the world.","summary_en":"1:5 the darkness can never extinguish it: Or the darkness has not understood it; literally the darkness cannot grasp it. The Greek word katalambanō (“grasp”) can mean either “understand” or “be hostile”; in John’s Gospel, it means hostility. The darkness would try to destroy Jesus (the light), but it would fail. The light would successfully bring salvation to the world.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111562,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:5","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:5","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:5<\/strong> <em>the darkness can never extinguish it:<\/em> Or <em>the darkness has not understood it;<\/em> literally <em>the darkness cannot grasp it.<\/em> The Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">katalambanō<\/span> (“grasp”) can mean either “understand” or “be hostile”; in John’s Gospel, it means hostility. The darkness would try to destroy Jesus (the light), but it would fail. The light would successfully bring salvation to the world.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:5<\/strong> <em>the darkness can never extinguish it:<\/em> Or <em>the darkness has not understood it;<\/em> literally <em>the darkness cannot grasp it.<\/em> The Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">katalambanō<\/span> (“grasp”) can mean either “understand” or “be hostile”; in John’s Gospel, it means hostility. The darkness would try to destroy Jesus (the light), but it would fail. The light would successfully bring salvation to the world.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:5 the darkness can never extinguish it: Or the darkness has not understood it; literally the darkness cannot grasp it. The Greek word katalambanō (“grasp”) can mean either “understand” or “be hostile”; in John’s Gospel, it means hostility. The darkness would try to destroy Jesus (the light), but it would fail. The light would successfully bring salvation to the world.","summary_en":"1:5 the darkness can never extinguish it: Or the darkness has not understood it; literally the darkness cannot grasp it. The Greek word katalambanō (“grasp”) can mean either “understand” or “be hostile”; in John’s Gospel, it means hostility. The darkness would try to destroy Jesus (the light), but it would fail. The light would successfully bring salvation to the world.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139188,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:5","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:5","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:5<\/strong> <em>the darkness can never extinguish it:<\/em> Or <em>the darkness has not understood it;<\/em> literally <em>the darkness cannot grasp it.<\/em> The Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">katalambanō<\/span> (“grasp”) can mean either “understand” or “be hostile”; in John’s Gospel, it means hostility. The darkness would try to destroy Jesus (the light), but it would fail. The light would successfully bring salvation to the world.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:5<\/strong> <em>the darkness can never extinguish it:<\/em> Or <em>the darkness has not understood it;<\/em> literally <em>the darkness cannot grasp it.<\/em> The Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">katalambanō<\/span> (“grasp”) can mean either “understand” or “be hostile”; in John’s Gospel, it means hostility. The darkness would try to destroy Jesus (the light), but it would fail. The light would successfully bring salvation to the world.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:5 the darkness can never extinguish it: Or the darkness has not understood it; literally the darkness cannot grasp it. The Greek word katalambanō (“grasp”) can mean either “understand” or “be hostile”; in John’s Gospel, it means hostility. The darkness would try to destroy Jesus (the light), but it would fail. The light would successfully bring salvation to the world.","summary_en":"1:5 the darkness can never extinguish it: Or the darkness has not understood it; literally the darkness cannot grasp it. The Greek word katalambanō (“grasp”) can mean either “understand” or “be hostile”; in John’s Gospel, it means hostility. The darkness would try to destroy Jesus (the light), but it would fail. The light would successfully bring salvation to the world.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":63202,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Darkness and Light","title_en":"Darkness and Light","content_ro":"<h3>Darkness and Light<\/h3>\n<h5>Darkness<\/h5>\n<p>Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 <em>\/\/<\/em> 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sam 22:10 <em>\/\/<\/em> Ps 18:9). God is unknowable unless he reveals himself.<\/p>\n<p>Darkness often stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gen 15:12; Job 12:25; 19:8; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Isa 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>For Job, darkness was like nothingness (Job 3:4-6). It points to death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Job 10:21-22; 17:12-13; Eccl 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>Evil takes place under the cover of darkness (Job 24:16-17), but darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Ps 139:11-12; Isa 29:15-16). Darkness often depicts ignorance of God’s will: Knowledge of God is “light,” so lack of knowledge is “darkness” (Job 12:24-25; Matt 4:16; John 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11). Moral depravity is described as darkness (Prov 2:13; 4:19; Isa 5:20; 60:2). In the New Testament, darkness is also a metaphor for spiritual ignorance (Matt 4:16; 6:23; Luke 1:79; 11:35; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13). Those who come to know God come out of darkness (Isa 9:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of the Old Testament prophets was the Day of the Lord, which was often associated with darkness (Ezek 32:8; Joel 2:2, 31; Amos 5:18, 20; Zeph 1:15). The New Testament also links darkness with judgment (Matt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pet 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13).<\/p>\n<h5>Light<\/h5>\n<p>Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gen 1:3; see also 1:16). It is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting (Eccl 11:7; Jas 1:17). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led by a pillar of cloud and fire that gave them light (Exod 13:21; 14:20) and showed them the way to go (Neh 9:19). Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord (Job 12:22; 29:2-3; Pss 4:6; 18:28; 44:3; 118:27). God’s servants can extend this blessing by being a light to guide others (Isa 42:6; 49:6). God’s light also exposes sin and brings justice (see Ps 90:8; Isa 51:4).<\/p>\n<p>God himself is described as light (Ps 27:1; Isa 60:19-20; Dan 2:22; 1 Jn 1:5), and he dwells in unapproachable light (see 1 Tim 6:16). Yet he brings his servants into the light (Mic 7:8-9; see also 1 Jn 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). He brought a revelation (light) from God, but he was more than a revealer—he was himself that revelation (John 1:1-10). Those who receive Jesus, who believe in the Light, receive the right to become children of God (John 1:9-12). They are illumined by his light and come to know God and his salvation (Matt 4:16; Luke 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18). They are “children of the light” (John 12:36; 1 Thes 5:5), their allegiance is to the light (1 Jn 1:7), and their conduct is characterized by light—by “what is good and right and true” (Eph 5:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-5, 14-18; 15:12; Exod 10:21-23; 14:20; 20:21; 2 Sam 22:10-13; 1 Kgs 8:12; Job 3:3-7; 12:22-25; 15:22; 17:12-13; 34:22; Pss 18:11, 28; 27:1; 97:2-6; 139:11-12; Prov 2:13; 4:18-19; Eccl 11:7-8; Isa 5:20; 9:2; 29:15; 51:4; 60:2-3, 19-20; Dan 2:22; Mic 7:8-9; Matt 4:16; 6:22-23; 8:12; Luke 1:78-79; 2:32; John 1:4-9; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-36, 46; Acts 13:47; 26:18; Rom 2:19-20; Eph 5:7-14; 1 Thes 5:5-8; 1 Tim 6:16; Jas 1:17; 2 Pet 2:17; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:7-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Darkness and Light<\/h3>\n<h5>Darkness<\/h5>\n<p>Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 <em>\/\/<\/em> 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sam 22:10 <em>\/\/<\/em> Ps 18:9). God is unknowable unless he reveals himself.<\/p>\n<p>Darkness often stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gen 15:12; Job 12:25; 19:8; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Isa 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>For Job, darkness was like nothingness (Job 3:4-6). It points to death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Job 10:21-22; 17:12-13; Eccl 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>Evil takes place under the cover of darkness (Job 24:16-17), but darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Ps 139:11-12; Isa 29:15-16). Darkness often depicts ignorance of God’s will: Knowledge of God is “light,” so lack of knowledge is “darkness” (Job 12:24-25; Matt 4:16; John 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11). Moral depravity is described as darkness (Prov 2:13; 4:19; Isa 5:20; 60:2). In the New Testament, darkness is also a metaphor for spiritual ignorance (Matt 4:16; 6:23; Luke 1:79; 11:35; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13). Those who come to know God come out of darkness (Isa 9:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of the Old Testament prophets was the Day of the Lord, which was often associated with darkness (Ezek 32:8; Joel 2:2, 31; Amos 5:18, 20; Zeph 1:15). The New Testament also links darkness with judgment (Matt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pet 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13).<\/p>\n<h5>Light<\/h5>\n<p>Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gen 1:3; see also 1:16). It is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting (Eccl 11:7; Jas 1:17). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led by a pillar of cloud and fire that gave them light (Exod 13:21; 14:20) and showed them the way to go (Neh 9:19). Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord (Job 12:22; 29:2-3; Pss 4:6; 18:28; 44:3; 118:27). God’s servants can extend this blessing by being a light to guide others (Isa 42:6; 49:6). God’s light also exposes sin and brings justice (see Ps 90:8; Isa 51:4).<\/p>\n<p>God himself is described as light (Ps 27:1; Isa 60:19-20; Dan 2:22; 1 Jn 1:5), and he dwells in unapproachable light (see 1 Tim 6:16). Yet he brings his servants into the light (Mic 7:8-9; see also 1 Jn 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). He brought a revelation (light) from God, but he was more than a revealer—he was himself that revelation (John 1:1-10). Those who receive Jesus, who believe in the Light, receive the right to become children of God (John 1:9-12). They are illumined by his light and come to know God and his salvation (Matt 4:16; Luke 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18). They are “children of the light” (John 12:36; 1 Thes 5:5), their allegiance is to the light (1 Jn 1:7), and their conduct is characterized by light—by “what is good and right and true” (Eph 5:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-5, 14-18; 15:12; Exod 10:21-23; 14:20; 20:21; 2 Sam 22:10-13; 1 Kgs 8:12; Job 3:3-7; 12:22-25; 15:22; 17:12-13; 34:22; Pss 18:11, 28; 27:1; 97:2-6; 139:11-12; Prov 2:13; 4:18-19; Eccl 11:7-8; Isa 5:20; 9:2; 29:15; 51:4; 60:2-3, 19-20; Dan 2:22; Mic 7:8-9; Matt 4:16; 6:22-23; 8:12; Luke 1:78-79; 2:32; John 1:4-9; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-36, 46; Acts 13:47; 26:18; Rom 2:19-20; Eph 5:7-14; 1 Thes 5:5-8; 1 Tim 6:16; Jas 1:17; 2 Pet 2:17; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:7-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Darkness and Light Darkness Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23). There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 \/\/ 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sa...","summary_en":"Darkness and Light Darkness Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23). There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 \/\/ 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sa...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64497,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Temple Architecture as Theology","title_en":"Temple Architecture as Theology","content_ro":"<h3>Temple Architecture as Theology<\/h3>\n<p>The Temple plan given in Ezekiel 40–43 does not seem physically buildable, nor was it intended to be. The details given in the plan are not sufficient to guide construction, as can be seen from the varying diagrams created by scholars. The materials to be used are not specified, as they were in great detail for the Tabernacle (Exod 25:10–40:33). Neither is there evidence that any attempt was made later to build the Second Temple according to this plan. Thus, Ezekiel’s plan for the Temple is evidently not a blueprint for future construction.<\/p>\n<p>Instead, Ezekiel’s Temple vision is a theological statement in the form of an architectural plan. The vision’s message is intended to shame Ezekiel’s generation for their past and motivate them to be faithful in the future (Ezek 43:10-12). The vision describes a new world in which boundaries between the holy and the unholy are established and standards are raised, so that God may return to his Temple to dwell among his people once again (see 10:3-4, 18; 11:22-23). Access to the realm of the holy is considerably restricted. Those who were faithful in the past are granted renewed access, while those who had been unfaithful are marginalized. There is a deepened interest in the sacrifices of atonement and purification for the people.<\/p>\n<p>This grand, new Temple points to Jesus Christ, in whom God’s glory is revealed. His body was a temple that was to be torn down and then built back up in three days (John 2:19). In Jesus, the light of God’s holiness shone out clearly in the darkness, and the darkness was not able to extinguish it (John 1:5). His body was the perfect, once-for-all sacrifice that purified the people (Heb 10:12). Those who are in Christ now have the privilege of access through him to the heavenly Most Holy Place in the new Jerusalem. Its doors stand permanently open to those who have washed their robes and made them clean in the blood of the Lamb (see Rev 21; 22:14).<\/p>\n<p>Since we have been united to Christ and have become part of his body, the new temple, how can we live any longer as we once did? The Holy Spirit dwells in us, and our bodies no longer belong to ourselves but to him as parts of his new temple (1 Cor 6:15-20). A holy life is the mark of God’s children (1 Pet 1:13-16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:10–40:33; Lev 10:9-11; Ezek 22:26; 40:1–43:27; John 2:19; 1 Cor 6:15-20; Heb 9:22–10:19; 1 Pet 1:13-16; Rev 21:1-27<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Temple Architecture as Theology<\/h3>\n<p>The Temple plan given in Ezekiel 40–43 does not seem physically buildable, nor was it intended to be. The details given in the plan are not sufficient to guide construction, as can be seen from the varying diagrams created by scholars. The materials to be used are not specified, as they were in great detail for the Tabernacle (Exod 25:10–40:33). Neither is there evidence that any attempt was made later to build the Second Temple according to this plan. Thus, Ezekiel’s plan for the Temple is evidently not a blueprint for future construction.<\/p>\n<p>Instead, Ezekiel’s Temple vision is a theological statement in the form of an architectural plan. The vision’s message is intended to shame Ezekiel’s generation for their past and motivate them to be faithful in the future (Ezek 43:10-12). The vision describes a new world in which boundaries between the holy and the unholy are established and standards are raised, so that God may return to his Temple to dwell among his people once again (see 10:3-4, 18; 11:22-23). Access to the realm of the holy is considerably restricted. Those who were faithful in the past are granted renewed access, while those who had been unfaithful are marginalized. There is a deepened interest in the sacrifices of atonement and purification for the people.<\/p>\n<p>This grand, new Temple points to Jesus Christ, in whom God’s glory is revealed. His body was a temple that was to be torn down and then built back up in three days (John 2:19). In Jesus, the light of God’s holiness shone out clearly in the darkness, and the darkness was not able to extinguish it (John 1:5). His body was the perfect, once-for-all sacrifice that purified the people (Heb 10:12). Those who are in Christ now have the privilege of access through him to the heavenly Most Holy Place in the new Jerusalem. Its doors stand permanently open to those who have washed their robes and made them clean in the blood of the Lamb (see Rev 21; 22:14).<\/p>\n<p>Since we have been united to Christ and have become part of his body, the new temple, how can we live any longer as we once did? The Holy Spirit dwells in us, and our bodies no longer belong to ourselves but to him as parts of his new temple (1 Cor 6:15-20). A holy life is the mark of God’s children (1 Pet 1:13-16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:10–40:33; Lev 10:9-11; Ezek 22:26; 40:1–43:27; John 2:19; 1 Cor 6:15-20; Heb 9:22–10:19; 1 Pet 1:13-16; Rev 21:1-27<\/p>","summary_ro":"Temple Architecture as Theology The Temple plan given in Ezekiel 40–43 does not seem physically buildable, nor was it intended to be. The details given in the plan are not sufficient to guide construction, as can be seen from the varying diagrams created by scholars. The materials to be used are not specified, as they were in great detail for the Tabernacle (Exod 25:10–40:33). Neither is there evidence that any attempt was made later to build the Second Temple according to this plan. Thus, Ez...","summary_en":"Temple Architecture as Theology The Temple plan given in Ezekiel 40–43 does not seem physically buildable, nor was it intended to be. The details given in the plan are not sufficient to guide construction, as can be seen from the varying diagrams created by scholars. The materials to be used are not specified, as they were in great detail for the Tabernacle (Exod 25:10–40:33). Neither is there evidence that any attempt was made later to build the Second Temple according to this plan. Thus, Ez...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65911,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>The world still lives in darkness and cannot understand the realities of life or of God (1:5, 10). Divine revelation is inaccessible to the world. In fact, when the light of God penetrates the darkness, exposing the ugliness of the world, many people flee deeper into the darkness because they prefer it to the light (3:19-20). Only the transforming power of God’s Spirit can provide understanding and help people see clearly as children of God (3:21; 8:12; 12:35-36, 46).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 6:8-13; 56:10-11; Matt 13:11-17; John 1:10-11; 3:19-20; John 7:32-36; 9:40-41; 12:40; Rom 1:21; 2 Cor 3:13-18; 4:3-4; 1 Jn 2:9-11; Rev 3:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>The world still lives in darkness and cannot understand the realities of life or of God (1:5, 10). Divine revelation is inaccessible to the world. In fact, when the light of God penetrates the darkness, exposing the ugliness of the world, many people flee deeper into the darkness because they prefer it to the light (3:19-20). Only the transforming power of God’s Spirit can provide understanding and help people see clearly as children of God (3:21; 8:12; 12:35-36, 46).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 6:8-13; 56:10-11; Matt 13:11-17; John 1:10-11; 3:19-20; John 7:32-36; 9:40-41; 12:40; Rom 1:21; 2 Cor 3:13-18; 4:3-4; 1 Jn 2:9-11; Rev 3:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13). The world still lives in darkness and canno...","summary_en":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13). The world still lives in darkness and canno...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":90828,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Darkness and Light","title_en":"Darkness and Light","content_ro":"<h3>Darkness and Light<\/h3>\n<h5>Darkness<\/h5>\n<p>Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 <em>\/\/<\/em> 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sam 22:10 <em>\/\/<\/em> Ps 18:9). God is unknowable unless he reveals himself.<\/p>\n<p>Darkness often stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gen 15:12; Job 12:25; 19:8; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Isa 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>For Job, darkness was like nothingness (Job 3:4-6). It points to death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Job 10:21-22; 17:12-13; Eccl 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>Evil takes place under the cover of darkness (Job 24:16-17), but darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Ps 139:11-12; Isa 29:15-16). Darkness often depicts ignorance of God’s will: Knowledge of God is “light,” so lack of knowledge is “darkness” (Job 12:24-25; Matt 4:16; John 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11). Moral depravity is described as darkness (Prov 2:13; 4:19; Isa 5:20; 60:2). In the New Testament, darkness is also a metaphor for spiritual ignorance (Matt 4:16; 6:23; Luke 1:79; 11:35; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13). Those who come to know God come out of darkness (Isa 9:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of the Old Testament prophets was the Day of the Lord, which was often associated with darkness (Ezek 32:8; Joel 2:2, 31; Amos 5:18, 20; Zeph 1:15). The New Testament also links darkness with judgment (Matt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pet 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13).<\/p>\n<h5>Light<\/h5>\n<p>Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gen 1:3; see also 1:16). It is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting (Eccl 11:7; Jas 1:17). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led by a pillar of cloud and fire that gave them light (Exod 13:21; 14:20) and showed them the way to go (Neh 9:19). Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord (Job 12:22; 29:2-3; Pss 4:6; 18:28; 44:3; 118:27). God’s servants can extend this blessing by being a light to guide others (Isa 42:6; 49:6). God’s light also exposes sin and brings justice (see Ps 90:8; Isa 51:4).<\/p>\n<p>God himself is described as light (Ps 27:1; Isa 60:19-20; Dan 2:22; 1 Jn 1:5), and he dwells in unapproachable light (see 1 Tim 6:16). Yet he brings his servants into the light (Mic 7:8-9; see also 1 Jn 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). He brought a revelation (light) from God, but he was more than a revealer—he was himself that revelation (John 1:1-10). Those who receive Jesus, who believe in the Light, receive the right to become children of God (John 1:9-12). They are illumined by his light and come to know God and his salvation (Matt 4:16; Luke 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18). They are “children of the light” (John 12:36; 1 Thes 5:5), their allegiance is to the light (1 Jn 1:7), and their conduct is characterized by light—by “what is good and right and true” (Eph 5:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-5, 14-18; 15:12; Exod 10:21-23; 14:20; 20:21; 2 Sam 22:10-13; 1 Kgs 8:12; Job 3:3-7; 12:22-25; 15:22; 17:12-13; 34:22; Pss 18:11, 28; 27:1; 97:2-6; 139:11-12; Prov 2:13; 4:18-19; Eccl 11:7-8; Isa 5:20; 9:2; 29:15; 51:4; 60:2-3, 19-20; Dan 2:22; Mic 7:8-9; Matt 4:16; 6:22-23; 8:12; Luke 1:78-79; 2:32; John 1:4-9; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-36, 46; Acts 13:47; 26:18; Rom 2:19-20; Eph 5:7-14; 1 Thes 5:5-8; 1 Tim 6:16; Jas 1:17; 2 Pet 2:17; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:7-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Darkness and Light<\/h3>\n<h5>Darkness<\/h5>\n<p>Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 <em>\/\/<\/em> 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sam 22:10 <em>\/\/<\/em> Ps 18:9). God is unknowable unless he reveals himself.<\/p>\n<p>Darkness often stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gen 15:12; Job 12:25; 19:8; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Isa 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>For Job, darkness was like nothingness (Job 3:4-6). It points to death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Job 10:21-22; 17:12-13; Eccl 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>Evil takes place under the cover of darkness (Job 24:16-17), but darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Ps 139:11-12; Isa 29:15-16). Darkness often depicts ignorance of God’s will: Knowledge of God is “light,” so lack of knowledge is “darkness” (Job 12:24-25; Matt 4:16; John 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11). Moral depravity is described as darkness (Prov 2:13; 4:19; Isa 5:20; 60:2). In the New Testament, darkness is also a metaphor for spiritual ignorance (Matt 4:16; 6:23; Luke 1:79; 11:35; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13). Those who come to know God come out of darkness (Isa 9:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of the Old Testament prophets was the Day of the Lord, which was often associated with darkness (Ezek 32:8; Joel 2:2, 31; Amos 5:18, 20; Zeph 1:15). The New Testament also links darkness with judgment (Matt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pet 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13).<\/p>\n<h5>Light<\/h5>\n<p>Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gen 1:3; see also 1:16). It is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting (Eccl 11:7; Jas 1:17). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led by a pillar of cloud and fire that gave them light (Exod 13:21; 14:20) and showed them the way to go (Neh 9:19). Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord (Job 12:22; 29:2-3; Pss 4:6; 18:28; 44:3; 118:27). God’s servants can extend this blessing by being a light to guide others (Isa 42:6; 49:6). God’s light also exposes sin and brings justice (see Ps 90:8; Isa 51:4).<\/p>\n<p>God himself is described as light (Ps 27:1; Isa 60:19-20; Dan 2:22; 1 Jn 1:5), and he dwells in unapproachable light (see 1 Tim 6:16). Yet he brings his servants into the light (Mic 7:8-9; see also 1 Jn 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). He brought a revelation (light) from God, but he was more than a revealer—he was himself that revelation (John 1:1-10). Those who receive Jesus, who believe in the Light, receive the right to become children of God (John 1:9-12). They are illumined by his light and come to know God and his salvation (Matt 4:16; Luke 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18). They are “children of the light” (John 12:36; 1 Thes 5:5), their allegiance is to the light (1 Jn 1:7), and their conduct is characterized by light—by “what is good and right and true” (Eph 5:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-5, 14-18; 15:12; Exod 10:21-23; 14:20; 20:21; 2 Sam 22:10-13; 1 Kgs 8:12; Job 3:3-7; 12:22-25; 15:22; 17:12-13; 34:22; Pss 18:11, 28; 27:1; 97:2-6; 139:11-12; Prov 2:13; 4:18-19; Eccl 11:7-8; Isa 5:20; 9:2; 29:15; 51:4; 60:2-3, 19-20; Dan 2:22; Mic 7:8-9; Matt 4:16; 6:22-23; 8:12; Luke 1:78-79; 2:32; John 1:4-9; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-36, 46; Acts 13:47; 26:18; Rom 2:19-20; Eph 5:7-14; 1 Thes 5:5-8; 1 Tim 6:16; Jas 1:17; 2 Pet 2:17; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:7-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Darkness and Light Darkness Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23). There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 \/\/ 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sa...","summary_en":"Darkness and Light Darkness Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23). There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 \/\/ 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sa...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92123,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Temple Architecture as Theology","title_en":"Temple Architecture as Theology","content_ro":"<h3>Temple Architecture as Theology<\/h3>\n<p>The Temple plan given in Ezekiel 40–43 does not seem physically buildable, nor was it intended to be. The details given in the plan are not sufficient to guide construction, as can be seen from the varying diagrams created by scholars. The materials to be used are not specified, as they were in great detail for the Tabernacle (Exod 25:10–40:33). Neither is there evidence that any attempt was made later to build the Second Temple according to this plan. Thus, Ezekiel’s plan for the Temple is evidently not a blueprint for future construction.<\/p>\n<p>Instead, Ezekiel’s Temple vision is a theological statement in the form of an architectural plan. The vision’s message is intended to shame Ezekiel’s generation for their past and motivate them to be faithful in the future (Ezek 43:10-12). The vision describes a new world in which boundaries between the holy and the unholy are established and standards are raised, so that God may return to his Temple to dwell among his people once again (see 10:3-4, 18; 11:22-23). Access to the realm of the holy is considerably restricted. Those who were faithful in the past are granted renewed access, while those who had been unfaithful are marginalized. There is a deepened interest in the sacrifices of atonement and purification for the people.<\/p>\n<p>This grand, new Temple points to Jesus Christ, in whom God’s glory is revealed. His body was a temple that was to be torn down and then built back up in three days (John 2:19). In Jesus, the light of God’s holiness shone out clearly in the darkness, and the darkness was not able to extinguish it (John 1:5). His body was the perfect, once-for-all sacrifice that purified the people (Heb 10:12). Those who are in Christ now have the privilege of access through him to the heavenly Most Holy Place in the new Jerusalem. Its doors stand permanently open to those who have washed their robes and made them clean in the blood of the Lamb (see Rev 21; 22:14).<\/p>\n<p>Since we have been united to Christ and have become part of his body, the new temple, how can we live any longer as we once did? The Holy Spirit dwells in us, and our bodies no longer belong to ourselves but to him as parts of his new temple (1 Cor 6:15-20). A holy life is the mark of God’s children (1 Pet 1:13-16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:10–40:33; Lev 10:9-11; Ezek 22:26; 40:1–43:27; John 2:19; 1 Cor 6:15-20; Heb 9:22–10:19; 1 Pet 1:13-16; Rev 21:1-27<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Temple Architecture as Theology<\/h3>\n<p>The Temple plan given in Ezekiel 40–43 does not seem physically buildable, nor was it intended to be. The details given in the plan are not sufficient to guide construction, as can be seen from the varying diagrams created by scholars. The materials to be used are not specified, as they were in great detail for the Tabernacle (Exod 25:10–40:33). Neither is there evidence that any attempt was made later to build the Second Temple according to this plan. Thus, Ezekiel’s plan for the Temple is evidently not a blueprint for future construction.<\/p>\n<p>Instead, Ezekiel’s Temple vision is a theological statement in the form of an architectural plan. The vision’s message is intended to shame Ezekiel’s generation for their past and motivate them to be faithful in the future (Ezek 43:10-12). The vision describes a new world in which boundaries between the holy and the unholy are established and standards are raised, so that God may return to his Temple to dwell among his people once again (see 10:3-4, 18; 11:22-23). Access to the realm of the holy is considerably restricted. Those who were faithful in the past are granted renewed access, while those who had been unfaithful are marginalized. There is a deepened interest in the sacrifices of atonement and purification for the people.<\/p>\n<p>This grand, new Temple points to Jesus Christ, in whom God’s glory is revealed. His body was a temple that was to be torn down and then built back up in three days (John 2:19). In Jesus, the light of God’s holiness shone out clearly in the darkness, and the darkness was not able to extinguish it (John 1:5). His body was the perfect, once-for-all sacrifice that purified the people (Heb 10:12). Those who are in Christ now have the privilege of access through him to the heavenly Most Holy Place in the new Jerusalem. Its doors stand permanently open to those who have washed their robes and made them clean in the blood of the Lamb (see Rev 21; 22:14).<\/p>\n<p>Since we have been united to Christ and have become part of his body, the new temple, how can we live any longer as we once did? The Holy Spirit dwells in us, and our bodies no longer belong to ourselves but to him as parts of his new temple (1 Cor 6:15-20). A holy life is the mark of God’s children (1 Pet 1:13-16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:10–40:33; Lev 10:9-11; Ezek 22:26; 40:1–43:27; John 2:19; 1 Cor 6:15-20; Heb 9:22–10:19; 1 Pet 1:13-16; Rev 21:1-27<\/p>","summary_ro":"Temple Architecture as Theology The Temple plan given in Ezekiel 40–43 does not seem physically buildable, nor was it intended to be. The details given in the plan are not sufficient to guide construction, as can be seen from the varying diagrams created by scholars. The materials to be used are not specified, as they were in great detail for the Tabernacle (Exod 25:10–40:33). Neither is there evidence that any attempt was made later to build the Second Temple according to this plan. Thus, Ez...","summary_en":"Temple Architecture as Theology The Temple plan given in Ezekiel 40–43 does not seem physically buildable, nor was it intended to be. The details given in the plan are not sufficient to guide construction, as can be seen from the varying diagrams created by scholars. The materials to be used are not specified, as they were in great detail for the Tabernacle (Exod 25:10–40:33). Neither is there evidence that any attempt was made later to build the Second Temple according to this plan. Thus, Ez...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93537,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>The world still lives in darkness and cannot understand the realities of life or of God (1:5, 10). Divine revelation is inaccessible to the world. In fact, when the light of God penetrates the darkness, exposing the ugliness of the world, many people flee deeper into the darkness because they prefer it to the light (3:19-20). Only the transforming power of God’s Spirit can provide understanding and help people see clearly as children of God (3:21; 8:12; 12:35-36, 46).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 6:8-13; 56:10-11; Matt 13:11-17; John 1:10-11; 3:19-20; John 7:32-36; 9:40-41; 12:40; Rom 1:21; 2 Cor 3:13-18; 4:3-4; 1 Jn 2:9-11; Rev 3:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>The world still lives in darkness and cannot understand the realities of life or of God (1:5, 10). Divine revelation is inaccessible to the world. In fact, when the light of God penetrates the darkness, exposing the ugliness of the world, many people flee deeper into the darkness because they prefer it to the light (3:19-20). Only the transforming power of God’s Spirit can provide understanding and help people see clearly as children of God (3:21; 8:12; 12:35-36, 46).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 6:8-13; 56:10-11; Matt 13:11-17; John 1:10-11; 3:19-20; John 7:32-36; 9:40-41; 12:40; Rom 1:21; 2 Cor 3:13-18; 4:3-4; 1 Jn 2:9-11; Rev 3:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13). The world still lives in darkness and canno...","summary_en":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13). The world still lives in darkness and canno...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":118454,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Darkness and Light","title_en":"Darkness and Light","content_ro":"<h3>Darkness and Light<\/h3>\n<h5>Darkness<\/h5>\n<p>Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 <em>\/\/<\/em> 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sam 22:10 <em>\/\/<\/em> Ps 18:9). God is unknowable unless he reveals himself.<\/p>\n<p>Darkness often stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gen 15:12; Job 12:25; 19:8; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Isa 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>For Job, darkness was like nothingness (Job 3:4-6). It points to death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Job 10:21-22; 17:12-13; Eccl 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>Evil takes place under the cover of darkness (Job 24:16-17), but darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Ps 139:11-12; Isa 29:15-16). Darkness often depicts ignorance of God’s will: Knowledge of God is “light,” so lack of knowledge is “darkness” (Job 12:24-25; Matt 4:16; John 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11). Moral depravity is described as darkness (Prov 2:13; 4:19; Isa 5:20; 60:2). In the New Testament, darkness is also a metaphor for spiritual ignorance (Matt 4:16; 6:23; Luke 1:79; 11:35; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13). Those who come to know God come out of darkness (Isa 9:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of the Old Testament prophets was the Day of the Lord, which was often associated with darkness (Ezek 32:8; Joel 2:2, 31; Amos 5:18, 20; Zeph 1:15). The New Testament also links darkness with judgment (Matt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pet 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13).<\/p>\n<h5>Light<\/h5>\n<p>Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gen 1:3; see also 1:16). It is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting (Eccl 11:7; Jas 1:17). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led by a pillar of cloud and fire that gave them light (Exod 13:21; 14:20) and showed them the way to go (Neh 9:19). Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord (Job 12:22; 29:2-3; Pss 4:6; 18:28; 44:3; 118:27). God’s servants can extend this blessing by being a light to guide others (Isa 42:6; 49:6). God’s light also exposes sin and brings justice (see Ps 90:8; Isa 51:4).<\/p>\n<p>God himself is described as light (Ps 27:1; Isa 60:19-20; Dan 2:22; 1 Jn 1:5), and he dwells in unapproachable light (see 1 Tim 6:16). Yet he brings his servants into the light (Mic 7:8-9; see also 1 Jn 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). He brought a revelation (light) from God, but he was more than a revealer—he was himself that revelation (John 1:1-10). Those who receive Jesus, who believe in the Light, receive the right to become children of God (John 1:9-12). They are illumined by his light and come to know God and his salvation (Matt 4:16; Luke 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18). They are “children of the light” (John 12:36; 1 Thes 5:5), their allegiance is to the light (1 Jn 1:7), and their conduct is characterized by light—by “what is good and right and true” (Eph 5:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-5, 14-18; 15:12; Exod 10:21-23; 14:20; 20:21; 2 Sam 22:10-13; 1 Kgs 8:12; Job 3:3-7; 12:22-25; 15:22; 17:12-13; 34:22; Pss 18:11, 28; 27:1; 97:2-6; 139:11-12; Prov 2:13; 4:18-19; Eccl 11:7-8; Isa 5:20; 9:2; 29:15; 51:4; 60:2-3, 19-20; Dan 2:22; Mic 7:8-9; Matt 4:16; 6:22-23; 8:12; Luke 1:78-79; 2:32; John 1:4-9; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-36, 46; Acts 13:47; 26:18; Rom 2:19-20; Eph 5:7-14; 1 Thes 5:5-8; 1 Tim 6:16; Jas 1:17; 2 Pet 2:17; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:7-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Darkness and Light<\/h3>\n<h5>Darkness<\/h5>\n<p>Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 <em>\/\/<\/em> 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sam 22:10 <em>\/\/<\/em> Ps 18:9). God is unknowable unless he reveals himself.<\/p>\n<p>Darkness often stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gen 15:12; Job 12:25; 19:8; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Isa 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>For Job, darkness was like nothingness (Job 3:4-6). It points to death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Job 10:21-22; 17:12-13; Eccl 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>Evil takes place under the cover of darkness (Job 24:16-17), but darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Ps 139:11-12; Isa 29:15-16). Darkness often depicts ignorance of God’s will: Knowledge of God is “light,” so lack of knowledge is “darkness” (Job 12:24-25; Matt 4:16; John 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11). Moral depravity is described as darkness (Prov 2:13; 4:19; Isa 5:20; 60:2). In the New Testament, darkness is also a metaphor for spiritual ignorance (Matt 4:16; 6:23; Luke 1:79; 11:35; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13). Those who come to know God come out of darkness (Isa 9:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of the Old Testament prophets was the Day of the Lord, which was often associated with darkness (Ezek 32:8; Joel 2:2, 31; Amos 5:18, 20; Zeph 1:15). The New Testament also links darkness with judgment (Matt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pet 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13).<\/p>\n<h5>Light<\/h5>\n<p>Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gen 1:3; see also 1:16). It is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting (Eccl 11:7; Jas 1:17). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led by a pillar of cloud and fire that gave them light (Exod 13:21; 14:20) and showed them the way to go (Neh 9:19). Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord (Job 12:22; 29:2-3; Pss 4:6; 18:28; 44:3; 118:27). God’s servants can extend this blessing by being a light to guide others (Isa 42:6; 49:6). God’s light also exposes sin and brings justice (see Ps 90:8; Isa 51:4).<\/p>\n<p>God himself is described as light (Ps 27:1; Isa 60:19-20; Dan 2:22; 1 Jn 1:5), and he dwells in unapproachable light (see 1 Tim 6:16). Yet he brings his servants into the light (Mic 7:8-9; see also 1 Jn 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). He brought a revelation (light) from God, but he was more than a revealer—he was himself that revelation (John 1:1-10). Those who receive Jesus, who believe in the Light, receive the right to become children of God (John 1:9-12). They are illumined by his light and come to know God and his salvation (Matt 4:16; Luke 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18). They are “children of the light” (John 12:36; 1 Thes 5:5), their allegiance is to the light (1 Jn 1:7), and their conduct is characterized by light—by “what is good and right and true” (Eph 5:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-5, 14-18; 15:12; Exod 10:21-23; 14:20; 20:21; 2 Sam 22:10-13; 1 Kgs 8:12; Job 3:3-7; 12:22-25; 15:22; 17:12-13; 34:22; Pss 18:11, 28; 27:1; 97:2-6; 139:11-12; Prov 2:13; 4:18-19; Eccl 11:7-8; Isa 5:20; 9:2; 29:15; 51:4; 60:2-3, 19-20; Dan 2:22; Mic 7:8-9; Matt 4:16; 6:22-23; 8:12; Luke 1:78-79; 2:32; John 1:4-9; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-36, 46; Acts 13:47; 26:18; Rom 2:19-20; Eph 5:7-14; 1 Thes 5:5-8; 1 Tim 6:16; Jas 1:17; 2 Pet 2:17; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:7-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Darkness and Light Darkness Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23). There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 \/\/ 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sa...","summary_en":"Darkness and Light Darkness Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23). There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 \/\/ 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sa...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":119749,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Temple Architecture as Theology","title_en":"Temple Architecture as Theology","content_ro":"<h3>Temple Architecture as Theology<\/h3>\n<p>The Temple plan given in Ezekiel 40–43 does not seem physically buildable, nor was it intended to be. The details given in the plan are not sufficient to guide construction, as can be seen from the varying diagrams created by scholars. The materials to be used are not specified, as they were in great detail for the Tabernacle (Exod 25:10–40:33). Neither is there evidence that any attempt was made later to build the Second Temple according to this plan. Thus, Ezekiel’s plan for the Temple is evidently not a blueprint for future construction.<\/p>\n<p>Instead, Ezekiel’s Temple vision is a theological statement in the form of an architectural plan. The vision’s message is intended to shame Ezekiel’s generation for their past and motivate them to be faithful in the future (Ezek 43:10-12). The vision describes a new world in which boundaries between the holy and the unholy are established and standards are raised, so that God may return to his Temple to dwell among his people once again (see 10:3-4, 18; 11:22-23). Access to the realm of the holy is considerably restricted. Those who were faithful in the past are granted renewed access, while those who had been unfaithful are marginalized. There is a deepened interest in the sacrifices of atonement and purification for the people.<\/p>\n<p>This grand, new Temple points to Jesus Christ, in whom God’s glory is revealed. His body was a temple that was to be torn down and then built back up in three days (John 2:19). In Jesus, the light of God’s holiness shone out clearly in the darkness, and the darkness was not able to extinguish it (John 1:5). His body was the perfect, once-for-all sacrifice that purified the people (Heb 10:12). Those who are in Christ now have the privilege of access through him to the heavenly Most Holy Place in the new Jerusalem. Its doors stand permanently open to those who have washed their robes and made them clean in the blood of the Lamb (see Rev 21; 22:14).<\/p>\n<p>Since we have been united to Christ and have become part of his body, the new temple, how can we live any longer as we once did? The Holy Spirit dwells in us, and our bodies no longer belong to ourselves but to him as parts of his new temple (1 Cor 6:15-20). A holy life is the mark of God’s children (1 Pet 1:13-16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:10–40:33; Lev 10:9-11; Ezek 22:26; 40:1–43:27; John 2:19; 1 Cor 6:15-20; Heb 9:22–10:19; 1 Pet 1:13-16; Rev 21:1-27<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Temple Architecture as Theology<\/h3>\n<p>The Temple plan given in Ezekiel 40–43 does not seem physically buildable, nor was it intended to be. The details given in the plan are not sufficient to guide construction, as can be seen from the varying diagrams created by scholars. The materials to be used are not specified, as they were in great detail for the Tabernacle (Exod 25:10–40:33). Neither is there evidence that any attempt was made later to build the Second Temple according to this plan. Thus, Ezekiel’s plan for the Temple is evidently not a blueprint for future construction.<\/p>\n<p>Instead, Ezekiel’s Temple vision is a theological statement in the form of an architectural plan. The vision’s message is intended to shame Ezekiel’s generation for their past and motivate them to be faithful in the future (Ezek 43:10-12). The vision describes a new world in which boundaries between the holy and the unholy are established and standards are raised, so that God may return to his Temple to dwell among his people once again (see 10:3-4, 18; 11:22-23). Access to the realm of the holy is considerably restricted. Those who were faithful in the past are granted renewed access, while those who had been unfaithful are marginalized. There is a deepened interest in the sacrifices of atonement and purification for the people.<\/p>\n<p>This grand, new Temple points to Jesus Christ, in whom God’s glory is revealed. His body was a temple that was to be torn down and then built back up in three days (John 2:19). In Jesus, the light of God’s holiness shone out clearly in the darkness, and the darkness was not able to extinguish it (John 1:5). His body was the perfect, once-for-all sacrifice that purified the people (Heb 10:12). Those who are in Christ now have the privilege of access through him to the heavenly Most Holy Place in the new Jerusalem. Its doors stand permanently open to those who have washed their robes and made them clean in the blood of the Lamb (see Rev 21; 22:14).<\/p>\n<p>Since we have been united to Christ and have become part of his body, the new temple, how can we live any longer as we once did? The Holy Spirit dwells in us, and our bodies no longer belong to ourselves but to him as parts of his new temple (1 Cor 6:15-20). A holy life is the mark of God’s children (1 Pet 1:13-16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:10–40:33; Lev 10:9-11; Ezek 22:26; 40:1–43:27; John 2:19; 1 Cor 6:15-20; Heb 9:22–10:19; 1 Pet 1:13-16; Rev 21:1-27<\/p>","summary_ro":"Temple Architecture as Theology The Temple plan given in Ezekiel 40–43 does not seem physically buildable, nor was it intended to be. The details given in the plan are not sufficient to guide construction, as can be seen from the varying diagrams created by scholars. The materials to be used are not specified, as they were in great detail for the Tabernacle (Exod 25:10–40:33). Neither is there evidence that any attempt was made later to build the Second Temple according to this plan. Thus, Ez...","summary_en":"Temple Architecture as Theology The Temple plan given in Ezekiel 40–43 does not seem physically buildable, nor was it intended to be. The details given in the plan are not sufficient to guide construction, as can be seen from the varying diagrams created by scholars. The materials to be used are not specified, as they were in great detail for the Tabernacle (Exod 25:10–40:33). Neither is there evidence that any attempt was made later to build the Second Temple according to this plan. Thus, Ez...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121163,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>The world still lives in darkness and cannot understand the realities of life or of God (1:5, 10). Divine revelation is inaccessible to the world. In fact, when the light of God penetrates the darkness, exposing the ugliness of the world, many people flee deeper into the darkness because they prefer it to the light (3:19-20). Only the transforming power of God’s Spirit can provide understanding and help people see clearly as children of God (3:21; 8:12; 12:35-36, 46).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 6:8-13; 56:10-11; Matt 13:11-17; John 1:10-11; 3:19-20; John 7:32-36; 9:40-41; 12:40; Rom 1:21; 2 Cor 3:13-18; 4:3-4; 1 Jn 2:9-11; Rev 3:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>The world still lives in darkness and cannot understand the realities of life or of God (1:5, 10). Divine revelation is inaccessible to the world. In fact, when the light of God penetrates the darkness, exposing the ugliness of the world, many people flee deeper into the darkness because they prefer it to the light (3:19-20). Only the transforming power of God’s Spirit can provide understanding and help people see clearly as children of God (3:21; 8:12; 12:35-36, 46).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 6:8-13; 56:10-11; Matt 13:11-17; John 1:10-11; 3:19-20; John 7:32-36; 9:40-41; 12:40; Rom 1:21; 2 Cor 3:13-18; 4:3-4; 1 Jn 2:9-11; Rev 3:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13). The world still lives in darkness and canno...","summary_en":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13). The world still lives in darkness and canno...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":146080,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Darkness and Light","title_en":"Darkness and Light","content_ro":"<h3>Darkness and Light<\/h3>\n<h5>Darkness<\/h5>\n<p>Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 <em>\/\/<\/em> 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sam 22:10 <em>\/\/<\/em> Ps 18:9). God is unknowable unless he reveals himself.<\/p>\n<p>Darkness often stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gen 15:12; Job 12:25; 19:8; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Isa 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>For Job, darkness was like nothingness (Job 3:4-6). It points to death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Job 10:21-22; 17:12-13; Eccl 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>Evil takes place under the cover of darkness (Job 24:16-17), but darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Ps 139:11-12; Isa 29:15-16). Darkness often depicts ignorance of God’s will: Knowledge of God is “light,” so lack of knowledge is “darkness” (Job 12:24-25; Matt 4:16; John 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11). Moral depravity is described as darkness (Prov 2:13; 4:19; Isa 5:20; 60:2). In the New Testament, darkness is also a metaphor for spiritual ignorance (Matt 4:16; 6:23; Luke 1:79; 11:35; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13). Those who come to know God come out of darkness (Isa 9:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of the Old Testament prophets was the Day of the Lord, which was often associated with darkness (Ezek 32:8; Joel 2:2, 31; Amos 5:18, 20; Zeph 1:15). The New Testament also links darkness with judgment (Matt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pet 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13).<\/p>\n<h5>Light<\/h5>\n<p>Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gen 1:3; see also 1:16). It is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting (Eccl 11:7; Jas 1:17). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led by a pillar of cloud and fire that gave them light (Exod 13:21; 14:20) and showed them the way to go (Neh 9:19). Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord (Job 12:22; 29:2-3; Pss 4:6; 18:28; 44:3; 118:27). God’s servants can extend this blessing by being a light to guide others (Isa 42:6; 49:6). God’s light also exposes sin and brings justice (see Ps 90:8; Isa 51:4).<\/p>\n<p>God himself is described as light (Ps 27:1; Isa 60:19-20; Dan 2:22; 1 Jn 1:5), and he dwells in unapproachable light (see 1 Tim 6:16). Yet he brings his servants into the light (Mic 7:8-9; see also 1 Jn 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). He brought a revelation (light) from God, but he was more than a revealer—he was himself that revelation (John 1:1-10). Those who receive Jesus, who believe in the Light, receive the right to become children of God (John 1:9-12). They are illumined by his light and come to know God and his salvation (Matt 4:16; Luke 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18). They are “children of the light” (John 12:36; 1 Thes 5:5), their allegiance is to the light (1 Jn 1:7), and their conduct is characterized by light—by “what is good and right and true” (Eph 5:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-5, 14-18; 15:12; Exod 10:21-23; 14:20; 20:21; 2 Sam 22:10-13; 1 Kgs 8:12; Job 3:3-7; 12:22-25; 15:22; 17:12-13; 34:22; Pss 18:11, 28; 27:1; 97:2-6; 139:11-12; Prov 2:13; 4:18-19; Eccl 11:7-8; Isa 5:20; 9:2; 29:15; 51:4; 60:2-3, 19-20; Dan 2:22; Mic 7:8-9; Matt 4:16; 6:22-23; 8:12; Luke 1:78-79; 2:32; John 1:4-9; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-36, 46; Acts 13:47; 26:18; Rom 2:19-20; Eph 5:7-14; 1 Thes 5:5-8; 1 Tim 6:16; Jas 1:17; 2 Pet 2:17; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:7-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Darkness and Light<\/h3>\n<h5>Darkness<\/h5>\n<p>Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 <em>\/\/<\/em> 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sam 22:10 <em>\/\/<\/em> Ps 18:9). God is unknowable unless he reveals himself.<\/p>\n<p>Darkness often stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gen 15:12; Job 12:25; 19:8; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Isa 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>For Job, darkness was like nothingness (Job 3:4-6). It points to death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Job 10:21-22; 17:12-13; Eccl 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>Evil takes place under the cover of darkness (Job 24:16-17), but darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Ps 139:11-12; Isa 29:15-16). Darkness often depicts ignorance of God’s will: Knowledge of God is “light,” so lack of knowledge is “darkness” (Job 12:24-25; Matt 4:16; John 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11). Moral depravity is described as darkness (Prov 2:13; 4:19; Isa 5:20; 60:2). In the New Testament, darkness is also a metaphor for spiritual ignorance (Matt 4:16; 6:23; Luke 1:79; 11:35; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13). Those who come to know God come out of darkness (Isa 9:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of the Old Testament prophets was the Day of the Lord, which was often associated with darkness (Ezek 32:8; Joel 2:2, 31; Amos 5:18, 20; Zeph 1:15). The New Testament also links darkness with judgment (Matt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pet 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13).<\/p>\n<h5>Light<\/h5>\n<p>Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gen 1:3; see also 1:16). It is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting (Eccl 11:7; Jas 1:17). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led by a pillar of cloud and fire that gave them light (Exod 13:21; 14:20) and showed them the way to go (Neh 9:19). Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord (Job 12:22; 29:2-3; Pss 4:6; 18:28; 44:3; 118:27). God’s servants can extend this blessing by being a light to guide others (Isa 42:6; 49:6). God’s light also exposes sin and brings justice (see Ps 90:8; Isa 51:4).<\/p>\n<p>God himself is described as light (Ps 27:1; Isa 60:19-20; Dan 2:22; 1 Jn 1:5), and he dwells in unapproachable light (see 1 Tim 6:16). Yet he brings his servants into the light (Mic 7:8-9; see also 1 Jn 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). He brought a revelation (light) from God, but he was more than a revealer—he was himself that revelation (John 1:1-10). Those who receive Jesus, who believe in the Light, receive the right to become children of God (John 1:9-12). They are illumined by his light and come to know God and his salvation (Matt 4:16; Luke 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18). They are “children of the light” (John 12:36; 1 Thes 5:5), their allegiance is to the light (1 Jn 1:7), and their conduct is characterized by light—by “what is good and right and true” (Eph 5:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-5, 14-18; 15:12; Exod 10:21-23; 14:20; 20:21; 2 Sam 22:10-13; 1 Kgs 8:12; Job 3:3-7; 12:22-25; 15:22; 17:12-13; 34:22; Pss 18:11, 28; 27:1; 97:2-6; 139:11-12; Prov 2:13; 4:18-19; Eccl 11:7-8; Isa 5:20; 9:2; 29:15; 51:4; 60:2-3, 19-20; Dan 2:22; Mic 7:8-9; Matt 4:16; 6:22-23; 8:12; Luke 1:78-79; 2:32; John 1:4-9; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-36, 46; Acts 13:47; 26:18; Rom 2:19-20; Eph 5:7-14; 1 Thes 5:5-8; 1 Tim 6:16; Jas 1:17; 2 Pet 2:17; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:7-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Darkness and Light Darkness Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23). There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 \/\/ 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sa...","summary_en":"Darkness and Light Darkness Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23). There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 \/\/ 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sa...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147375,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Temple Architecture as Theology","title_en":"Temple Architecture as Theology","content_ro":"<h3>Temple Architecture as Theology<\/h3>\n<p>The Temple plan given in Ezekiel 40–43 does not seem physically buildable, nor was it intended to be. The details given in the plan are not sufficient to guide construction, as can be seen from the varying diagrams created by scholars. The materials to be used are not specified, as they were in great detail for the Tabernacle (Exod 25:10–40:33). Neither is there evidence that any attempt was made later to build the Second Temple according to this plan. Thus, Ezekiel’s plan for the Temple is evidently not a blueprint for future construction.<\/p>\n<p>Instead, Ezekiel’s Temple vision is a theological statement in the form of an architectural plan. The vision’s message is intended to shame Ezekiel’s generation for their past and motivate them to be faithful in the future (Ezek 43:10-12). The vision describes a new world in which boundaries between the holy and the unholy are established and standards are raised, so that God may return to his Temple to dwell among his people once again (see 10:3-4, 18; 11:22-23). Access to the realm of the holy is considerably restricted. Those who were faithful in the past are granted renewed access, while those who had been unfaithful are marginalized. There is a deepened interest in the sacrifices of atonement and purification for the people.<\/p>\n<p>This grand, new Temple points to Jesus Christ, in whom God’s glory is revealed. His body was a temple that was to be torn down and then built back up in three days (John 2:19). In Jesus, the light of God’s holiness shone out clearly in the darkness, and the darkness was not able to extinguish it (John 1:5). His body was the perfect, once-for-all sacrifice that purified the people (Heb 10:12). Those who are in Christ now have the privilege of access through him to the heavenly Most Holy Place in the new Jerusalem. Its doors stand permanently open to those who have washed their robes and made them clean in the blood of the Lamb (see Rev 21; 22:14).<\/p>\n<p>Since we have been united to Christ and have become part of his body, the new temple, how can we live any longer as we once did? The Holy Spirit dwells in us, and our bodies no longer belong to ourselves but to him as parts of his new temple (1 Cor 6:15-20). A holy life is the mark of God’s children (1 Pet 1:13-16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:10–40:33; Lev 10:9-11; Ezek 22:26; 40:1–43:27; John 2:19; 1 Cor 6:15-20; Heb 9:22–10:19; 1 Pet 1:13-16; Rev 21:1-27<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Temple Architecture as Theology<\/h3>\n<p>The Temple plan given in Ezekiel 40–43 does not seem physically buildable, nor was it intended to be. The details given in the plan are not sufficient to guide construction, as can be seen from the varying diagrams created by scholars. The materials to be used are not specified, as they were in great detail for the Tabernacle (Exod 25:10–40:33). Neither is there evidence that any attempt was made later to build the Second Temple according to this plan. Thus, Ezekiel’s plan for the Temple is evidently not a blueprint for future construction.<\/p>\n<p>Instead, Ezekiel’s Temple vision is a theological statement in the form of an architectural plan. The vision’s message is intended to shame Ezekiel’s generation for their past and motivate them to be faithful in the future (Ezek 43:10-12). The vision describes a new world in which boundaries between the holy and the unholy are established and standards are raised, so that God may return to his Temple to dwell among his people once again (see 10:3-4, 18; 11:22-23). Access to the realm of the holy is considerably restricted. Those who were faithful in the past are granted renewed access, while those who had been unfaithful are marginalized. There is a deepened interest in the sacrifices of atonement and purification for the people.<\/p>\n<p>This grand, new Temple points to Jesus Christ, in whom God’s glory is revealed. His body was a temple that was to be torn down and then built back up in three days (John 2:19). In Jesus, the light of God’s holiness shone out clearly in the darkness, and the darkness was not able to extinguish it (John 1:5). His body was the perfect, once-for-all sacrifice that purified the people (Heb 10:12). Those who are in Christ now have the privilege of access through him to the heavenly Most Holy Place in the new Jerusalem. Its doors stand permanently open to those who have washed their robes and made them clean in the blood of the Lamb (see Rev 21; 22:14).<\/p>\n<p>Since we have been united to Christ and have become part of his body, the new temple, how can we live any longer as we once did? The Holy Spirit dwells in us, and our bodies no longer belong to ourselves but to him as parts of his new temple (1 Cor 6:15-20). A holy life is the mark of God’s children (1 Pet 1:13-16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:10–40:33; Lev 10:9-11; Ezek 22:26; 40:1–43:27; John 2:19; 1 Cor 6:15-20; Heb 9:22–10:19; 1 Pet 1:13-16; Rev 21:1-27<\/p>","summary_ro":"Temple Architecture as Theology The Temple plan given in Ezekiel 40–43 does not seem physically buildable, nor was it intended to be. The details given in the plan are not sufficient to guide construction, as can be seen from the varying diagrams created by scholars. The materials to be used are not specified, as they were in great detail for the Tabernacle (Exod 25:10–40:33). Neither is there evidence that any attempt was made later to build the Second Temple according to this plan. Thus, Ez...","summary_en":"Temple Architecture as Theology The Temple plan given in Ezekiel 40–43 does not seem physically buildable, nor was it intended to be. The details given in the plan are not sufficient to guide construction, as can be seen from the varying diagrams created by scholars. The materials to be used are not specified, as they were in great detail for the Tabernacle (Exod 25:10–40:33). Neither is there evidence that any attempt was made later to build the Second Temple according to this plan. Thus, Ez...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148789,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>The world still lives in darkness and cannot understand the realities of life or of God (1:5, 10). Divine revelation is inaccessible to the world. In fact, when the light of God penetrates the darkness, exposing the ugliness of the world, many people flee deeper into the darkness because they prefer it to the light (3:19-20). Only the transforming power of God’s Spirit can provide understanding and help people see clearly as children of God (3:21; 8:12; 12:35-36, 46).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 6:8-13; 56:10-11; Matt 13:11-17; John 1:10-11; 3:19-20; John 7:32-36; 9:40-41; 12:40; Rom 1:21; 2 Cor 3:13-18; 4:3-4; 1 Jn 2:9-11; Rev 3:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>The world still lives in darkness and cannot understand the realities of life or of God (1:5, 10). Divine revelation is inaccessible to the world. In fact, when the light of God penetrates the darkness, exposing the ugliness of the world, many people flee deeper into the darkness because they prefer it to the light (3:19-20). Only the transforming power of God’s Spirit can provide understanding and help people see clearly as children of God (3:21; 8:12; 12:35-36, 46).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 6:8-13; 56:10-11; Matt 13:11-17; John 1:10-11; 3:19-20; John 7:32-36; 9:40-41; 12:40; Rom 1:21; 2 Cor 3:13-18; 4:3-4; 1 Jn 2:9-11; Rev 3:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13). The world still lives in darkness and canno...","summary_en":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13). The world still lives in darkness and canno...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"6":[{"id":42437,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","summary_en":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":70063,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","summary_en":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97689,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","summary_en":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125315,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","summary_en":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20200,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel of John","title_en":"Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>JOHN, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>The fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospels. (See discussion above on John, the Apostle.)<\/p>\n\n<p>The Gospel appears to have been written by one who knew the Jews and the Palestine of Jesus’ day well. He was familiar with Jewish messianic expectations (e.g., Jn 1:20-21; 4:25; 7:40-42; 12:34). He knew of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9) and the contempt the Pharisees had for “the people of the land” (7:49). He knew of the importance attached to the religious schools (v 15). He knew the way the Sabbath was observed and was aware of the provision that the obligation to circumcise on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath regulations (vv 22-23). Throughout the Gospel he moved with certainty in the vast range of Jewish ideas and customs.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same with topography. The writer mentioned many places, and his place-names all seem to be used correctly. He referred to Cana, a village not mentioned in any earlier literature known to us, which means that the reference almost certainly came from someone who actually knew the place. He located Bethany with some precision as about 15 stadia from Jerusalem (about 2 miles, or 3.2 kilometers, 11:18). He had several references to places in or near Jerusalem, such as Bethesda (5:2), Siloam (9:7), and the Kidron Valley (18:1). Of course, this does not rule out some contemporary of John’s, but it makes it difficult to think of the author as a much later individual writing at a distance from Palestine. The evidence as we have it indicates that the writer was a Jew in the Palestine of Jesus’ day.<\/p>\n<p>To many careful readers, it seems that the Gospel bears the stamp of an eyewitness. For example, Jesus was teaching “in the treasury” (8:20). Nothing is made of the point; the incident could easily have been told without it. It looks like a reminiscence of someone who sees the scene in his mind’s eye as he writes. The fact that the house was filled with fragrance when the woman broke the perfume jar (12:3) does not materially affect the account but is the kind of detail that one who was there would remember. The author noted that the loaves used in the feeding of the multitude were barley loaves (6:9) and that Jesus’ tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top to bottom (19:23). He told us that the branches with which Jesus was greeted were palm branches (12:13), and that it was night when Judas went out (13:30). Such touches are found throughout the Gospel, and it seems unjustified to treat them as no more than an attempt to create verisimilitude. They seem much more like indications that the author was writing about events in which he had himself taken part.<\/p>\n<p>The early church accepted Johannine authorship without question. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all see the apostle as the author. The first to quote this Gospel by name was Theophilus of Antioch, about <span>AD<\/span> 180.<\/p>\n<p>Those who object to Johannine authorship emphasize the differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics. The argument is that if Jesus was anything like the Christ portrayed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he could not be like the Christ of the fourth Gospel. This is a completely subjective argument, ignoring the fact that any great man will appear differently to different people. The judgment of the church throughout the centuries has been that Jesus was large enough to inspire both portraits. To put the same point another way, we have no reason for holding that the first three Evangelists tell us all there is to know about Jesus. There is no contradiction. John simply brings out other aspects of Jesus’ life and teachings.<\/p>\n<p>While we cannot prove beyond all doubt that John the apostle was the author, we can say that there is more reason for holding to this view than to any other.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>It has been usual for conservatives and liberals alike to date this writing in the last decade of the first century or early in the second. Some liberal scholars have put it well into the second century, but this is not common, and it is remarkable that there has been such a considerable measure of agreement.<\/p>\n<p>It is said that this Gospel is dependent on the Synoptics, which means that it must be dated sometime after them. But this argument has been widely abandoned in recent times. There is so much in John that is without parallel in the other three Gospels, and conversely so much in the other three that John might have used had he known it, that it is very difficult indeed to hold that this writer had any of the other Gospels before him when he wrote, or even that he had read them. Such resemblances as there are seem better explained by common use of oral tradition.<\/p>\n<p>It is also argued that there is a very developed theology in John and that we must allow time for its development. Granted, the theology of this Gospel is profound, but this does not require that we must wait for it until the end of the first century. The theology of the Letter to the Romans is also profound, and there is no reason for dating that writing later than the 50s. On the ground of development, then, there is no reason for putting John later than Romans. Development is a slippery argument at best, for it usually takes place at uneven rates, and we have no means of knowing how fast it took place in the area where the author lived.<\/p>\n<p>Other arguments for a late date are no more conclusive. For example, it is urged that the ecclesiastical system presupposed by the Gospel is too late for the time of the apostle John, and that the sacramental system of chapters 3 and 6 must have taken time to develop. But John does not mention any sacrament. It is true that many scholars think these chapters refer to baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but the fact is that John mentions neither.<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising in view of the way the traditional arguments have crumbled away that many in recent times are arguing that John must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70. If it were later, why does not John have some reference to it? Some of his language appears to be earlier. In 5:2 he says there “is” (not “was”) a pool called Bethesda. And he often refers to the Twelve as Jesus’ disciples, or “his” disciples, or the like. In later times Christians usually said “the” disciples, for they saw no need to say whose the disciples were. But in the early days, when Christians were in contact with rabbis (each of whom had his disciples), it was important to show that Jesus’ disciples were in mind. It is important also that John makes no reference to any of the synoptic Gospels. The simplest explanation is that he had not seen them. They were not yet widely circulated.<\/p>\n<p>None of this enables us to date this Gospel with precision. But the weight of evidence points to an early date (before <span>AD<\/span> 70).<\/p>\n<p>The author was John the apostle, a Jew. However, the writing gives evidence of contact with Greek thought, for example, in the reference to Christ as “the Word” in chapter 1 and the translation of words like “rabbi” (1:38). It is almost universally held that such considerations compel us to see the work as originating in a center of Greek culture, and Ephesus has traditionally been favored. Before the end of the second century we have Irenaeus writing that John published the Gospel during his residence at Ephesus.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to similarities between John and the Odes of Solomon, which they think came from Syria. As there are also some resemblances in the language of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, this is held to show that John was written in Syria, probably at Antioch. Others again think that Egypt was the place, and they support this by pointing out that the oldest fragment of a manuscript of this Gospel was found there. There is no real evidence, and we are left with probabilities. There is much to be said for accepting the evidence of Irenaeus and seeing Ephesus as the place of origin, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>There is no real indication of the intended destination. From 20:31 we learn that the book was written that the readers might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and that by believing they might have life. The Gospel, then, has an evangelistic aim. But it is also possible that “believe” means “keep on believing”—“go on in faith,” rather than “begin to believe.” That is to say, the book may have been meant from the beginning to build people up in the faith. Probably we should not distinguish between these aims too sharply. Both may well be in mind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Several possible backgrounds to the Gospel have been suggested. The Greek interest is obvious, and this writing has sometimes been called the Gospel of the Hellenists. The suggestion is that we should look to Greek writings, perhaps the works of the philosophers or Philo of Alexandria, to find the right background against which to understand what John has written. This approach may be seen in the work of Rudolf Bultmann, who thought specifically of Gnosticism. Indeed, for Bultmann one of the sources of this Gospel was a discourse source that he thought was taken from non-Christian Gnosticism. Not many have been prepared to follow Bultmann, but a number of recent commentators have discerned some form of Gnosticism as the backdrop to John.<\/p>\n<p>While such views are put forward seriously, there are some substantial objections. One is that, despite the confident assertions of some scholars, Gnosticism has never been shown to be earlier than Christianity. In the form in which it comes before us in history, it is a Christian heresy, and of course, the Christian faith must appear before a Christian heresy is possible. Another objection is that there is a basic difference between the two systems. Gnosticism is concerned with knowledge (the very word is derived from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>,<\/em> “knowledge”). Its “redeemer” is one who comes from heaven with knowledge. But John does not subscribe to the view that man is saved by knowledge. The Redeemer comes to take away the sin of the world (1:29). Gnosticism tells people that life is an upward struggle; Christianity tells of a Savior who came down to raise them up. It is not easy to see any form of Gnosticism as the essential background to Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Much more significant is John’s Semitic background. Especially important here is the OT, accepted as sacred Scripture by Jew and Christian alike. It lies constantly behind John’s statements, and it must be studied carefully if John is to be understood. It is plain that John knew and loved the Septuagint, the translation into Greek of the Hebrew OT. Again and again, the Septuagint can be shown to lie behind what John says.<\/p>\n<p>In modern times important discoveries have been made at Qumran, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. Among the scrolls unearthed in the caves of this area are several that have affinities with John. Indeed, one of the interesting facts about the scrolls is that they have more parallels with John than with any other part of the NT, a fact difficult to explain if John was written late and at a distance from Palestine. The resemblances to the Qumran writings must be viewed with care, for there is often a linguistic resemblance where the thinking is quite different. For example, both use the unusual expression “the Spirit of truth.” But where John means one of the persons of the Trinity, the scrolls speak of “a spirit of truth” and “a spirit of error” striving in the souls of people. The connection is real, but John is clearly not dependent on the scrolls for his thinking. The contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they afford additional evidence that this Gospel is basically Palestinian and must be understood against a background of first-century Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Other backgrounds have been suggested, such as the Hermetic literature. This is a group of writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus (“Hermes Thrice-greatest”), a designation of the Egyptian god Thoth. There are indeed some points of contact with John, but they are few in comparison with those of writings rooted in Palestine. It is difficult to take such suggestions seriously. John is essentially Palestinian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The writer told us that Jesus did many “signs” (or miracles) that he had not recorded, but “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life” (Jn 20:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). John wrote to show that Jesus is the Messiah. But he did not do this simply with a view to conveying interesting information. He wanted his readers to see this knowledge as a challenge to faith; when they believe, they will have life. John sought to bring men and women to Christ; he had an evangelistic aim. That does not exhaust what he was trying to do, for his words have meaning for believers. It is important that believers have a right knowledge of Jesus and that they continue to believe.<\/p>\n<p>The main theological teaching of this Gospel, then, is that God has sent his Messiah, Jesus. He is the very Son of God, and he comes to bring life (3:16). Though Jesus told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, this is not often said so specifically. The avoidance of the term might well be because of the political overtones it had acquired among the Jews at large. They looked for a Messiah who would fight the Romans. He would defeat them and set up a mighty world empire with its capital in Jerusalem. Jesus was not aiming at anything like that, and it was important that he avoid the kind of language that would give that impression. But though the conventional messianic terminology is avoided, John left no doubt that Jesus was God’s chosen one. Again and again he depicted Jesus as fulfilling messianic functions. For example, in the long discourse in chapter 6 we see Jesus as the bread from heaven, fulfilling the expectation that when Messiah came, he would renew the manna; and in the giving of sight to the blind man (ch 9) we have another messianic function (cf. Is 35:5).<\/p>\n<p>With this greatness of Jesus, John also combined teaching about his lowliness. A continuing, though unobtrusive, strand of Johannine teaching is that Jesus depends on the Father for everything. Apart from the Father, Jesus said, he could do nothing (Jn 5:30). His very food is to do the Father’s will (4:34). He lives through the Father (6:57). It is the Father who gives him his disciples (6:37, 44; 17:6). It is the Father who bears witness to him (5:32, 37). John insists that Jesus is in no sense independent of the Father. In the mission of Jesus, John sees the working out of the purpose of the Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue and Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>John begins with a prologue (1:1-18) that is unlike anything in any of the other Gospels. In it he refers to Jesus as “the Word,” a term that has points of contact with both Greek and Hebrew thinking. As John uses it, it conveys the thought that Jesus is the expression of the mind of the Father. John speaks of the Word as God (1:1), sees him as active in creation (1:3-5), goes on to the witness borne to him by John the Baptist (1:6-8), speaks of the coming of the Word into the world (1:9-14), and finishes with a section on the greatness of the Word (1:15-18). In this prologue he briefly introduces some of the great themes that will be developed throughout the Gospel. It is a majestic introduction to the whole.<\/p>\n<p>Next we have the beginnings of Jesus’ public ministry (1:19-51). Jesus’ work was preceded by that of John the Baptist, and the Evangelist tells us first about the kind of witness that the Baptist gave to Jesus. Witness is one of his important concepts, and witness is all that John the Baptist does in this Gospel. From this witness we move to the way the first disciples came to Jesus. We learn something of how Andrew and Peter came to know the Lord. We read also of Philip and Nathanael, of whom we learn little or nothing in the other Gospels.<\/p>\n<h5>The Signs and Discourses (2:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The public ministry of Jesus is described in a very distinctive way in this Gospel. John has a long section (chs 2–12) in which he tells of a number of miracles Jesus did, interweaving into his account a series of discourses. Sometimes these are addresses given to groups of people, and sometimes they are talks with individuals. Some scholars call this section of the Gospel the Book of Signs, thus emphasizing the prominent place given to seven miracles. For John they are not simply wonders. They are meaningful; in the literal sense of the term they are <em>sign<\/em>ificant.<\/p>\n<p>The first of them is the turning of the water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee (2:1-11). The water in question is connected with Jewish rites of purification (v 6), and the story is surely to teach us that Jesus transforms life. He changes the water of the law into the wine of the gospel. As a result of this “sign,” his disciples believed in him (v 11). John went on to tell how Jesus went up to Jerusalem and drove the traders out of the temple. They were selling animals for sacrifice and changing money. But their business was being done in the Court of the Gentiles, the only place in the temple where a Gentile could come to meditate and pray.<\/p>\n<p>The first discourse is on the new birth (3:1-21). Jesus talked with Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, about the necessity for radical renewal if one is to enter the kingdom. Jesus was speaking of God’s regenerating activity, not some human reformation. Following this, John records a dispute between some of John’s disciples with a Jew on the subject of purification. This opens the way for a section that shows the superiority of Jesus over John the Baptist—by the Baptist’s own confession (3:22-36).<\/p>\n<p>The second discourse is really a long conversation Jesus had with the woman of Samaria, whom he met by a well (4:1-42). It turns on “the water of life,” a term that is not fully explained in this chapter but which we later find points to the life-giving Spirit (7:38-39). This leads to the story of the second sign, the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54), notable for the fact that Jesus healed at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>The third sign is the healing of the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (5:1-18). This man had spent many years waiting for healing at the moving of the water. Jesus told him to get up and walk, and he did. Because it was done on a Sabbath, the Pharisees objected. This leads to Jesus’ third discourse, that on the divine Son (5:19-47). Here the closeness of the relationship of Jesus to the Father is stressed, and his place in the judgment is brought out. There is emphasis also on the variety of witness who encountered Jesus, which shows how reasonable it is to accept him as God’s own Son.<\/p>\n<p>John’s fourth sign is the one miracle (apart from the resurrection) found in all four Gospels: the feeding of the 5,000 (6:1-15). It is followed by Jesus’ walking on water (vv 16-21), which seems to be meant as the fifth sign (though some scholars think not; if they are right, there are only six signs). Then comes the fourth discourse, the great sermon on the bread of life (vv 22-59). Jesus is this bread, which he gives to all men and women who believe in him. There are references to eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv 50-58), which point to his death. Some have seen in them a reference to Communion, but it is hard to see why Jesus should refer in this way to an as-yet-nonexistent sacrament. Moreover, much the same effect is attributed in the same discourse to believing (vv 35, 47). It seems best to understand Jesus as meaning that people must believe in him as the one who would die for them in order for them to have life.<\/p>\n<p>There is a section detailing Peter’s affirmation of loyalty in the face of some who drifted away from the Master (6:67-71). Then we come to the fifth discourse, on the life-giving Spirit (7:1-52). John has an important explanatory point of his own when he tells us that at the time the Spirit had not been given because Jesus had not yet been glorified (v 39). The fullness of the Spirit depends on the completion of the work of Christ in his death and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The sixth discourse tells of the light of the world (8:12-59). This aspect of Jesus’ person and ministry is dramatically brought out in the sixth sign, the healing of the man born blind (ch 9). It is a lively narrative, as the healed man conducts a spirited defense against the Pharisees who belittled Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most beautiful of all the illustrations of Jesus’ relations to his people is that on which he dwells in the seventh discourse, where he speaks of himself as the good shepherd (ch 10). There is the obvious truth that sheep depend entirely on their shepherd, but Jesus says something else. Whereas earthly shepherds live to meet the needs of their sheep, Jesus laid down his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The final sign is the raising of Lazarus (11:1-44), a man who had been dead for four days. The story graphically brings out Jesus’ power over death and his readiness to confer the gift of life. Jesus speaks of himself as “the resurrection and the life” (v 25); death cannot defeat him. He brings life to the dead, to the spiritually dead as well as to physically dead Lazarus. John goes on to note the reaction to this miracle: some believed, but some opposed Jesus (vv 45-57). He includes a notable saying of Caiaphas, the high priest, that one man should die for the people (vv 50-52). Caiaphas was speaking as a cynical politician (better one dead, however innocent, than the whole nation be troubled). But John saw in the words the deeper meaning that Jesus’ death would bring salvation to many.<\/p>\n<p>John rounds off his account of the ministry with the story of the anointing of Jesus by a woman in Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the coming of some Greeks to Jesus, and his final summary of what he had taught (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Last Supper<\/h5>\n<p>The account of what went on in the upper room on the night before the Crucifixion is the fullest of all the four Gospels. Curiously, John says nothing about the institution of Communion, a fact that has never been satisfactorily explained. But he tells us how Jesus washed the feet of the disciples (13:1-17), an action splendidly exemplifying the spirit of lowly service so soon to be shown on the cross. Then comes the prophecy of the betrayal, an action that set in motion the events that would lead to the cross (vv 18-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the long discourse that follows, Jesus dealt with some questions posed by his followers and went on to teach them some important truths, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). He develops the thought that he is the true vine, the disciples being vitally joined to him as branches to the vine. It is important for the branches to remain in the vine if they are to have life (15:1-16). Then come some words about suffering that would be of help to them in times of persecution (vv 17-25). Jesus goes on to speak about the Holy Spirit (15:26–16:15). This is a very important passage, for it contains much more about the Spirit than we find elsewhere in Jesus’ words. Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete,” a title not easy to understand. It is in origin a legal term, and at least we can say that it indicates that the Spirit brings friendship, encouragement, and help. Jesus went on to speak of his approaching departure from the disciples and to prepare them for the trying time ahead (16:16-33). This part of the Gospel concludes with Jesus’ great High Priestly prayer. He prayed for the disciples to be one, as he commended them to the care of the heavenly Father (ch 17).<\/p>\n<h5>The Cross and Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, he went forward to meet them and they fell to the ground (18:1-11). He gave himself over to them; they did not take him over. At the outset of his passion narrative, John was making the point that Jesus is sovereign. He was not being defeated by the march of events but was sovereignly doing the will of the Father. John is the only one to tell us that Jesus was taken before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, the reigning high priest (18:12-14, 19-24). He tells also of Peter’s three denials of Jesus (vv 15-27). He did not spend much time on the Jewish trial, but he was much more explicit than the other Evangelists in his account of the Roman trial. Clearly, he had some special knowledge of what went on before Pilate. He presents a magnificent picture of Jesus talking with Pilate about kingship—the Son of God discussing with the representative of Caesar the meaning of sovereignty (vv 33-40).<\/p>\n<p>In his account of the Crucifixion John has a number of touches of his own, notably the way Jesus commended Mary to the care of the beloved disciple (19:26-27), the fact that the cry Jesus uttered as he died was “It is finished” (v 30), and the piercing of his side by a soldier’s spear (vv 31-37).<\/p>\n<p>John proceeds to the narrative of the burial (vv 38-42) and of the empty tomb (20:1-10). He speaks of appearances of the risen Lord to Mary Magdalene (vv 11-18), and to the disciples—both without (vv 19-23) and with Thomas (vv 24-29).<\/p>\n<p>The final chapter, an epilogue, tells of a miraculous catch of fish (21:1-14) and goes on to the moving account of Peter’s threefold declaration of love to Jesus and his restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOHN, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>The fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospels. (See discussion above on John, the Apostle.)<\/p>\n\n<p>The Gospel appears to have been written by one who knew the Jews and the Palestine of Jesus’ day well. He was familiar with Jewish messianic expectations (e.g., Jn 1:20-21; 4:25; 7:40-42; 12:34). He knew of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9) and the contempt the Pharisees had for “the people of the land” (7:49). He knew of the importance attached to the religious schools (v 15). He knew the way the Sabbath was observed and was aware of the provision that the obligation to circumcise on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath regulations (vv 22-23). Throughout the Gospel he moved with certainty in the vast range of Jewish ideas and customs.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same with topography. The writer mentioned many places, and his place-names all seem to be used correctly. He referred to Cana, a village not mentioned in any earlier literature known to us, which means that the reference almost certainly came from someone who actually knew the place. He located Bethany with some precision as about 15 stadia from Jerusalem (about 2 miles, or 3.2 kilometers, 11:18). He had several references to places in or near Jerusalem, such as Bethesda (5:2), Siloam (9:7), and the Kidron Valley (18:1). Of course, this does not rule out some contemporary of John’s, but it makes it difficult to think of the author as a much later individual writing at a distance from Palestine. The evidence as we have it indicates that the writer was a Jew in the Palestine of Jesus’ day.<\/p>\n<p>To many careful readers, it seems that the Gospel bears the stamp of an eyewitness. For example, Jesus was teaching “in the treasury” (8:20). Nothing is made of the point; the incident could easily have been told without it. It looks like a reminiscence of someone who sees the scene in his mind’s eye as he writes. The fact that the house was filled with fragrance when the woman broke the perfume jar (12:3) does not materially affect the account but is the kind of detail that one who was there would remember. The author noted that the loaves used in the feeding of the multitude were barley loaves (6:9) and that Jesus’ tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top to bottom (19:23). He told us that the branches with which Jesus was greeted were palm branches (12:13), and that it was night when Judas went out (13:30). Such touches are found throughout the Gospel, and it seems unjustified to treat them as no more than an attempt to create verisimilitude. They seem much more like indications that the author was writing about events in which he had himself taken part.<\/p>\n<p>The early church accepted Johannine authorship without question. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all see the apostle as the author. The first to quote this Gospel by name was Theophilus of Antioch, about <span>AD<\/span> 180.<\/p>\n<p>Those who object to Johannine authorship emphasize the differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics. The argument is that if Jesus was anything like the Christ portrayed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he could not be like the Christ of the fourth Gospel. This is a completely subjective argument, ignoring the fact that any great man will appear differently to different people. The judgment of the church throughout the centuries has been that Jesus was large enough to inspire both portraits. To put the same point another way, we have no reason for holding that the first three Evangelists tell us all there is to know about Jesus. There is no contradiction. John simply brings out other aspects of Jesus’ life and teachings.<\/p>\n<p>While we cannot prove beyond all doubt that John the apostle was the author, we can say that there is more reason for holding to this view than to any other.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>It has been usual for conservatives and liberals alike to date this writing in the last decade of the first century or early in the second. Some liberal scholars have put it well into the second century, but this is not common, and it is remarkable that there has been such a considerable measure of agreement.<\/p>\n<p>It is said that this Gospel is dependent on the Synoptics, which means that it must be dated sometime after them. But this argument has been widely abandoned in recent times. There is so much in John that is without parallel in the other three Gospels, and conversely so much in the other three that John might have used had he known it, that it is very difficult indeed to hold that this writer had any of the other Gospels before him when he wrote, or even that he had read them. Such resemblances as there are seem better explained by common use of oral tradition.<\/p>\n<p>It is also argued that there is a very developed theology in John and that we must allow time for its development. Granted, the theology of this Gospel is profound, but this does not require that we must wait for it until the end of the first century. The theology of the Letter to the Romans is also profound, and there is no reason for dating that writing later than the 50s. On the ground of development, then, there is no reason for putting John later than Romans. Development is a slippery argument at best, for it usually takes place at uneven rates, and we have no means of knowing how fast it took place in the area where the author lived.<\/p>\n<p>Other arguments for a late date are no more conclusive. For example, it is urged that the ecclesiastical system presupposed by the Gospel is too late for the time of the apostle John, and that the sacramental system of chapters 3 and 6 must have taken time to develop. But John does not mention any sacrament. It is true that many scholars think these chapters refer to baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but the fact is that John mentions neither.<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising in view of the way the traditional arguments have crumbled away that many in recent times are arguing that John must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70. If it were later, why does not John have some reference to it? Some of his language appears to be earlier. In 5:2 he says there “is” (not “was”) a pool called Bethesda. And he often refers to the Twelve as Jesus’ disciples, or “his” disciples, or the like. In later times Christians usually said “the” disciples, for they saw no need to say whose the disciples were. But in the early days, when Christians were in contact with rabbis (each of whom had his disciples), it was important to show that Jesus’ disciples were in mind. It is important also that John makes no reference to any of the synoptic Gospels. The simplest explanation is that he had not seen them. They were not yet widely circulated.<\/p>\n<p>None of this enables us to date this Gospel with precision. But the weight of evidence points to an early date (before <span>AD<\/span> 70).<\/p>\n<p>The author was John the apostle, a Jew. However, the writing gives evidence of contact with Greek thought, for example, in the reference to Christ as “the Word” in chapter 1 and the translation of words like “rabbi” (1:38). It is almost universally held that such considerations compel us to see the work as originating in a center of Greek culture, and Ephesus has traditionally been favored. Before the end of the second century we have Irenaeus writing that John published the Gospel during his residence at Ephesus.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to similarities between John and the Odes of Solomon, which they think came from Syria. As there are also some resemblances in the language of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, this is held to show that John was written in Syria, probably at Antioch. Others again think that Egypt was the place, and they support this by pointing out that the oldest fragment of a manuscript of this Gospel was found there. There is no real evidence, and we are left with probabilities. There is much to be said for accepting the evidence of Irenaeus and seeing Ephesus as the place of origin, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>There is no real indication of the intended destination. From 20:31 we learn that the book was written that the readers might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and that by believing they might have life. The Gospel, then, has an evangelistic aim. But it is also possible that “believe” means “keep on believing”—“go on in faith,” rather than “begin to believe.” That is to say, the book may have been meant from the beginning to build people up in the faith. Probably we should not distinguish between these aims too sharply. Both may well be in mind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Several possible backgrounds to the Gospel have been suggested. The Greek interest is obvious, and this writing has sometimes been called the Gospel of the Hellenists. The suggestion is that we should look to Greek writings, perhaps the works of the philosophers or Philo of Alexandria, to find the right background against which to understand what John has written. This approach may be seen in the work of Rudolf Bultmann, who thought specifically of Gnosticism. Indeed, for Bultmann one of the sources of this Gospel was a discourse source that he thought was taken from non-Christian Gnosticism. Not many have been prepared to follow Bultmann, but a number of recent commentators have discerned some form of Gnosticism as the backdrop to John.<\/p>\n<p>While such views are put forward seriously, there are some substantial objections. One is that, despite the confident assertions of some scholars, Gnosticism has never been shown to be earlier than Christianity. In the form in which it comes before us in history, it is a Christian heresy, and of course, the Christian faith must appear before a Christian heresy is possible. Another objection is that there is a basic difference between the two systems. Gnosticism is concerned with knowledge (the very word is derived from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>,<\/em> “knowledge”). Its “redeemer” is one who comes from heaven with knowledge. But John does not subscribe to the view that man is saved by knowledge. The Redeemer comes to take away the sin of the world (1:29). Gnosticism tells people that life is an upward struggle; Christianity tells of a Savior who came down to raise them up. It is not easy to see any form of Gnosticism as the essential background to Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Much more significant is John’s Semitic background. Especially important here is the OT, accepted as sacred Scripture by Jew and Christian alike. It lies constantly behind John’s statements, and it must be studied carefully if John is to be understood. It is plain that John knew and loved the Septuagint, the translation into Greek of the Hebrew OT. Again and again, the Septuagint can be shown to lie behind what John says.<\/p>\n<p>In modern times important discoveries have been made at Qumran, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. Among the scrolls unearthed in the caves of this area are several that have affinities with John. Indeed, one of the interesting facts about the scrolls is that they have more parallels with John than with any other part of the NT, a fact difficult to explain if John was written late and at a distance from Palestine. The resemblances to the Qumran writings must be viewed with care, for there is often a linguistic resemblance where the thinking is quite different. For example, both use the unusual expression “the Spirit of truth.” But where John means one of the persons of the Trinity, the scrolls speak of “a spirit of truth” and “a spirit of error” striving in the souls of people. The connection is real, but John is clearly not dependent on the scrolls for his thinking. The contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they afford additional evidence that this Gospel is basically Palestinian and must be understood against a background of first-century Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Other backgrounds have been suggested, such as the Hermetic literature. This is a group of writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus (“Hermes Thrice-greatest”), a designation of the Egyptian god Thoth. There are indeed some points of contact with John, but they are few in comparison with those of writings rooted in Palestine. It is difficult to take such suggestions seriously. John is essentially Palestinian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The writer told us that Jesus did many “signs” (or miracles) that he had not recorded, but “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life” (Jn 20:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). John wrote to show that Jesus is the Messiah. But he did not do this simply with a view to conveying interesting information. He wanted his readers to see this knowledge as a challenge to faith; when they believe, they will have life. John sought to bring men and women to Christ; he had an evangelistic aim. That does not exhaust what he was trying to do, for his words have meaning for believers. It is important that believers have a right knowledge of Jesus and that they continue to believe.<\/p>\n<p>The main theological teaching of this Gospel, then, is that God has sent his Messiah, Jesus. He is the very Son of God, and he comes to bring life (3:16). Though Jesus told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, this is not often said so specifically. The avoidance of the term might well be because of the political overtones it had acquired among the Jews at large. They looked for a Messiah who would fight the Romans. He would defeat them and set up a mighty world empire with its capital in Jerusalem. Jesus was not aiming at anything like that, and it was important that he avoid the kind of language that would give that impression. But though the conventional messianic terminology is avoided, John left no doubt that Jesus was God’s chosen one. Again and again he depicted Jesus as fulfilling messianic functions. For example, in the long discourse in chapter 6 we see Jesus as the bread from heaven, fulfilling the expectation that when Messiah came, he would renew the manna; and in the giving of sight to the blind man (ch 9) we have another messianic function (cf. Is 35:5).<\/p>\n<p>With this greatness of Jesus, John also combined teaching about his lowliness. A continuing, though unobtrusive, strand of Johannine teaching is that Jesus depends on the Father for everything. Apart from the Father, Jesus said, he could do nothing (Jn 5:30). His very food is to do the Father’s will (4:34). He lives through the Father (6:57). It is the Father who gives him his disciples (6:37, 44; 17:6). It is the Father who bears witness to him (5:32, 37). John insists that Jesus is in no sense independent of the Father. In the mission of Jesus, John sees the working out of the purpose of the Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue and Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>John begins with a prologue (1:1-18) that is unlike anything in any of the other Gospels. In it he refers to Jesus as “the Word,” a term that has points of contact with both Greek and Hebrew thinking. As John uses it, it conveys the thought that Jesus is the expression of the mind of the Father. John speaks of the Word as God (1:1), sees him as active in creation (1:3-5), goes on to the witness borne to him by John the Baptist (1:6-8), speaks of the coming of the Word into the world (1:9-14), and finishes with a section on the greatness of the Word (1:15-18). In this prologue he briefly introduces some of the great themes that will be developed throughout the Gospel. It is a majestic introduction to the whole.<\/p>\n<p>Next we have the beginnings of Jesus’ public ministry (1:19-51). Jesus’ work was preceded by that of John the Baptist, and the Evangelist tells us first about the kind of witness that the Baptist gave to Jesus. Witness is one of his important concepts, and witness is all that John the Baptist does in this Gospel. From this witness we move to the way the first disciples came to Jesus. We learn something of how Andrew and Peter came to know the Lord. We read also of Philip and Nathanael, of whom we learn little or nothing in the other Gospels.<\/p>\n<h5>The Signs and Discourses (2:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The public ministry of Jesus is described in a very distinctive way in this Gospel. John has a long section (chs 2–12) in which he tells of a number of miracles Jesus did, interweaving into his account a series of discourses. Sometimes these are addresses given to groups of people, and sometimes they are talks with individuals. Some scholars call this section of the Gospel the Book of Signs, thus emphasizing the prominent place given to seven miracles. For John they are not simply wonders. They are meaningful; in the literal sense of the term they are <em>sign<\/em>ificant.<\/p>\n<p>The first of them is the turning of the water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee (2:1-11). The water in question is connected with Jewish rites of purification (v 6), and the story is surely to teach us that Jesus transforms life. He changes the water of the law into the wine of the gospel. As a result of this “sign,” his disciples believed in him (v 11). John went on to tell how Jesus went up to Jerusalem and drove the traders out of the temple. They were selling animals for sacrifice and changing money. But their business was being done in the Court of the Gentiles, the only place in the temple where a Gentile could come to meditate and pray.<\/p>\n<p>The first discourse is on the new birth (3:1-21). Jesus talked with Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, about the necessity for radical renewal if one is to enter the kingdom. Jesus was speaking of God’s regenerating activity, not some human reformation. Following this, John records a dispute between some of John’s disciples with a Jew on the subject of purification. This opens the way for a section that shows the superiority of Jesus over John the Baptist—by the Baptist’s own confession (3:22-36).<\/p>\n<p>The second discourse is really a long conversation Jesus had with the woman of Samaria, whom he met by a well (4:1-42). It turns on “the water of life,” a term that is not fully explained in this chapter but which we later find points to the life-giving Spirit (7:38-39). This leads to the story of the second sign, the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54), notable for the fact that Jesus healed at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>The third sign is the healing of the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (5:1-18). This man had spent many years waiting for healing at the moving of the water. Jesus told him to get up and walk, and he did. Because it was done on a Sabbath, the Pharisees objected. This leads to Jesus’ third discourse, that on the divine Son (5:19-47). Here the closeness of the relationship of Jesus to the Father is stressed, and his place in the judgment is brought out. There is emphasis also on the variety of witness who encountered Jesus, which shows how reasonable it is to accept him as God’s own Son.<\/p>\n<p>John’s fourth sign is the one miracle (apart from the resurrection) found in all four Gospels: the feeding of the 5,000 (6:1-15). It is followed by Jesus’ walking on water (vv 16-21), which seems to be meant as the fifth sign (though some scholars think not; if they are right, there are only six signs). Then comes the fourth discourse, the great sermon on the bread of life (vv 22-59). Jesus is this bread, which he gives to all men and women who believe in him. There are references to eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv 50-58), which point to his death. Some have seen in them a reference to Communion, but it is hard to see why Jesus should refer in this way to an as-yet-nonexistent sacrament. Moreover, much the same effect is attributed in the same discourse to believing (vv 35, 47). It seems best to understand Jesus as meaning that people must believe in him as the one who would die for them in order for them to have life.<\/p>\n<p>There is a section detailing Peter’s affirmation of loyalty in the face of some who drifted away from the Master (6:67-71). Then we come to the fifth discourse, on the life-giving Spirit (7:1-52). John has an important explanatory point of his own when he tells us that at the time the Spirit had not been given because Jesus had not yet been glorified (v 39). The fullness of the Spirit depends on the completion of the work of Christ in his death and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The sixth discourse tells of the light of the world (8:12-59). This aspect of Jesus’ person and ministry is dramatically brought out in the sixth sign, the healing of the man born blind (ch 9). It is a lively narrative, as the healed man conducts a spirited defense against the Pharisees who belittled Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most beautiful of all the illustrations of Jesus’ relations to his people is that on which he dwells in the seventh discourse, where he speaks of himself as the good shepherd (ch 10). There is the obvious truth that sheep depend entirely on their shepherd, but Jesus says something else. Whereas earthly shepherds live to meet the needs of their sheep, Jesus laid down his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The final sign is the raising of Lazarus (11:1-44), a man who had been dead for four days. The story graphically brings out Jesus’ power over death and his readiness to confer the gift of life. Jesus speaks of himself as “the resurrection and the life” (v 25); death cannot defeat him. He brings life to the dead, to the spiritually dead as well as to physically dead Lazarus. John goes on to note the reaction to this miracle: some believed, but some opposed Jesus (vv 45-57). He includes a notable saying of Caiaphas, the high priest, that one man should die for the people (vv 50-52). Caiaphas was speaking as a cynical politician (better one dead, however innocent, than the whole nation be troubled). But John saw in the words the deeper meaning that Jesus’ death would bring salvation to many.<\/p>\n<p>John rounds off his account of the ministry with the story of the anointing of Jesus by a woman in Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the coming of some Greeks to Jesus, and his final summary of what he had taught (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Last Supper<\/h5>\n<p>The account of what went on in the upper room on the night before the Crucifixion is the fullest of all the four Gospels. Curiously, John says nothing about the institution of Communion, a fact that has never been satisfactorily explained. But he tells us how Jesus washed the feet of the disciples (13:1-17), an action splendidly exemplifying the spirit of lowly service so soon to be shown on the cross. Then comes the prophecy of the betrayal, an action that set in motion the events that would lead to the cross (vv 18-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the long discourse that follows, Jesus dealt with some questions posed by his followers and went on to teach them some important truths, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). He develops the thought that he is the true vine, the disciples being vitally joined to him as branches to the vine. It is important for the branches to remain in the vine if they are to have life (15:1-16). Then come some words about suffering that would be of help to them in times of persecution (vv 17-25). Jesus goes on to speak about the Holy Spirit (15:26–16:15). This is a very important passage, for it contains much more about the Spirit than we find elsewhere in Jesus’ words. Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete,” a title not easy to understand. It is in origin a legal term, and at least we can say that it indicates that the Spirit brings friendship, encouragement, and help. Jesus went on to speak of his approaching departure from the disciples and to prepare them for the trying time ahead (16:16-33). This part of the Gospel concludes with Jesus’ great High Priestly prayer. He prayed for the disciples to be one, as he commended them to the care of the heavenly Father (ch 17).<\/p>\n<h5>The Cross and Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, he went forward to meet them and they fell to the ground (18:1-11). He gave himself over to them; they did not take him over. At the outset of his passion narrative, John was making the point that Jesus is sovereign. He was not being defeated by the march of events but was sovereignly doing the will of the Father. John is the only one to tell us that Jesus was taken before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, the reigning high priest (18:12-14, 19-24). He tells also of Peter’s three denials of Jesus (vv 15-27). He did not spend much time on the Jewish trial, but he was much more explicit than the other Evangelists in his account of the Roman trial. Clearly, he had some special knowledge of what went on before Pilate. He presents a magnificent picture of Jesus talking with Pilate about kingship—the Son of God discussing with the representative of Caesar the meaning of sovereignty (vv 33-40).<\/p>\n<p>In his account of the Crucifixion John has a number of touches of his own, notably the way Jesus commended Mary to the care of the beloved disciple (19:26-27), the fact that the cry Jesus uttered as he died was “It is finished” (v 30), and the piercing of his side by a soldier’s spear (vv 31-37).<\/p>\n<p>John proceeds to the narrative of the burial (vv 38-42) and of the empty tomb (20:1-10). He speaks of appearances of the risen Lord to Mary Magdalene (vv 11-18), and to the disciples—both without (vv 19-23) and with Thomas (vv 24-29).<\/p>\n<p>The final chapter, an epilogue, tells of a miraculous catch of fish (21:1-14) and goes on to the moving account of Peter’s threefold declaration of love to Jesus and his restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOHN, Gospel of The fourth Gospel. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospe...","summary_en":"JOHN, Gospel of The fourth Gospel. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospe...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56311,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:6","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:6","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:6-9<\/strong> <em>God sent a man, John the Baptist,<\/em> to herald Jesus’ coming and to prepare God’s people to receive Jesus as God’s Son and Messiah (see 1:19-37; Luke 1:5-25, 57-80; 3:1-22; see also Isa 40:3; Mal 4:5-6).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:6-9<\/strong> <em>God sent a man, John the Baptist,<\/em> to herald Jesus’ coming and to prepare God’s people to receive Jesus as God’s Son and Messiah (see 1:19-37; Luke 1:5-25, 57-80; 3:1-22; see also Isa 40:3; Mal 4:5-6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:6-9 God sent a man, John the Baptist, to herald Jesus’ coming and to prepare God’s people to receive Jesus as God’s Son and Messiah (see 1:19-37; Luke 1:5-25, 57-80; 3:1-22; see also Isa 40:3; Mal 4:5-6).","summary_en":"1:6-9 God sent a man, John the Baptist, to herald Jesus’ coming and to prepare God’s people to receive Jesus as God’s Son and Messiah (see 1:19-37; Luke 1:5-25, 57-80; 3:1-22; see also Isa 40:3; Mal 4:5-6).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83937,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:6","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:6","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:6-9<\/strong> <em>God sent a man, John the Baptist,<\/em> to herald Jesus’ coming and to prepare God’s people to receive Jesus as God’s Son and Messiah (see 1:19-37; Luke 1:5-25, 57-80; 3:1-22; see also Isa 40:3; Mal 4:5-6).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:6-9<\/strong> <em>God sent a man, John the Baptist,<\/em> to herald Jesus’ coming and to prepare God’s people to receive Jesus as God’s Son and Messiah (see 1:19-37; Luke 1:5-25, 57-80; 3:1-22; see also Isa 40:3; Mal 4:5-6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:6-9 God sent a man, John the Baptist, to herald Jesus’ coming and to prepare God’s people to receive Jesus as God’s Son and Messiah (see 1:19-37; Luke 1:5-25, 57-80; 3:1-22; see also Isa 40:3; Mal 4:5-6).","summary_en":"1:6-9 God sent a man, John the Baptist, to herald Jesus’ coming and to prepare God’s people to receive Jesus as God’s Son and Messiah (see 1:19-37; Luke 1:5-25, 57-80; 3:1-22; see also Isa 40:3; Mal 4:5-6).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111563,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:6","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:6","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:6-9<\/strong> <em>God sent a man, John the Baptist,<\/em> to herald Jesus’ coming and to prepare God’s people to receive Jesus as God’s Son and Messiah (see 1:19-37; Luke 1:5-25, 57-80; 3:1-22; see also Isa 40:3; Mal 4:5-6).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:6-9<\/strong> <em>God sent a man, John the Baptist,<\/em> to herald Jesus’ coming and to prepare God’s people to receive Jesus as God’s Son and Messiah (see 1:19-37; Luke 1:5-25, 57-80; 3:1-22; see also Isa 40:3; Mal 4:5-6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:6-9 God sent a man, John the Baptist, to herald Jesus’ coming and to prepare God’s people to receive Jesus as God’s Son and Messiah (see 1:19-37; Luke 1:5-25, 57-80; 3:1-22; see also Isa 40:3; Mal 4:5-6).","summary_en":"1:6-9 God sent a man, John the Baptist, to herald Jesus’ coming and to prepare God’s people to receive Jesus as God’s Son and Messiah (see 1:19-37; Luke 1:5-25, 57-80; 3:1-22; see also Isa 40:3; Mal 4:5-6).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139189,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:6","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:6","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:6-9<\/strong> <em>God sent a man, John the Baptist,<\/em> to herald Jesus’ coming and to prepare God’s people to receive Jesus as God’s Son and Messiah (see 1:19-37; Luke 1:5-25, 57-80; 3:1-22; see also Isa 40:3; Mal 4:5-6).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:6-9<\/strong> <em>God sent a man, John the Baptist,<\/em> to herald Jesus’ coming and to prepare God’s people to receive Jesus as God’s Son and Messiah (see 1:19-37; Luke 1:5-25, 57-80; 3:1-22; see also Isa 40:3; Mal 4:5-6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:6-9 God sent a man, John the Baptist, to herald Jesus’ coming and to prepare God’s people to receive Jesus as God’s Son and Messiah (see 1:19-37; Luke 1:5-25, 57-80; 3:1-22; see also Isa 40:3; Mal 4:5-6).","summary_en":"1:6-9 God sent a man, John the Baptist, to herald Jesus’ coming and to prepare God’s people to receive Jesus as God’s Son and Messiah (see 1:19-37; Luke 1:5-25, 57-80; 3:1-22; see also Isa 40:3; Mal 4:5-6).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"7":[{"id":11840,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Faith","title_en":"Faith","content_ro":"<h3>FAITH<\/h3>\n<p>Belief in that which has no tangible proof; trust in God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DefinitionofFaith\">Definition of Faith<\/p>\n<p>In the OT and NT, “faith” carries several meanings. It may mean simple trust in God or in the Word of God, and at other times faith almost becomes equivalent to active obedience. It may also find expression in the affirmation of a creedal statement. Thus, it also comes to mean the entire body of received Christian teaching or truth—“the truth.” In Colossians 2:7, the term suggests something to be accepted as a whole and embodied in personal life. In 2 Timothy 4:7, Paul witnesses to having “kept the faith.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FaithintheOldTestament\">Faith in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT also strongly emphasizes faith as confidence in God’s covenant or in the covenant God made with Abraham and his descendants. The call of Abraham and the promise that his descendants would be used in the history of redemption became the basis of the narratives of the OT, being seen as the working out of that covenant. Once the nation Israel was brought into being, God sustained and protected it. The exodus from Egypt is a prominent indication that God was at work restoring his people to the Promised Land. The obedience of the people of God as the proper expression of faith is seen clearly in the OT. Without seeing God, his people believed and obeyed him. Abraham left his native land to go into unknown territory. The people of Israel left Egypt following the leadership of God to a land they could not see. The promise of God gave them courage to possess the land promised to them. After the exodus, the covenant of Abraham was confirmed with the people of Israel by the sprinkling of blood (Ex 24:6-7). There was to be strict obedience to God’s commands as an expression of faith. This response of human faith to the Lord’s faithfulness was national and collective. There also were commands to, and instances of, personal faith.<\/p>\n<p>Not only the narrative and legal portions of the OT but also the poetic and prophetic writings emphasize faith. The Psalms abound in expressions of personal confidence in the Lord even in dark times. Habakkuk points out that “the righteous shall live by his faith” (Hb 2:4). From such instances it is clear that, as the Lord’s education of Israel proceeded, the matter of faith in God’s faithfulness became more and more a matter of individual and personal response, and it is in the Prophets that several ingredients—such as trust, obedience, fear, and certainty—blend into the understanding of such personal faith.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FaithintheNewTestament\">Faith in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>As over against the OT, where the accent is on the faithfulness of God, in the NT the emphasis is placed on the active, responding faith of the hearer to the promised, final revelation in the Messiah, Jesus. Both verb and noun regularly describe the adequate response of people to Jesus’ word and to the gospel.<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>The most striking feature of the synoptic Gospels (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>) is the use of faith without identifying its object: “If you have faith as a grain of mustard seed” (Mt 17:20); “When Jesus saw their faith” (Mk 2:5); “Your faith has saved you” (Lk 7:50). Jesus is portrayed as one who by his work and word opens the door to faith and makes faith possible. The question is not whether the faith is in Jesus or in the Father; the implication is undoubtedly both, but as with every true bearer of the Word of God, the eye of faith is turned to the One who sends.<\/p>\n<p>On more than one occasion, Jesus denies the request for a miracle to substantiate his words (Mt 12:38-39; 16:1-4). Faith is response to the Word alone without any supporting props. No sign is to be given but the sign of Jonah. In the story of the rich man and Lazarus (Lk 16:19-31), Jesus denies the request for the spectacular and insists that the hearer must respond to the word given to him (cf. Jn 20:29). The Word demands self-surrender and commitment. Hence, the very nature of the Word and of faith becomes an obstacle to the proud and the powerful.<\/p>\n<p>Faith is the medium by which the power of God is made visible. It moves mountains, heals the sick, and is the means of entrance into the kingdom. It may be mingled with doubt, as with the father who sought healing for his son (“I believe; help my unbelief!” [Mk 9:24]), or as with John the Baptist in prison, who, even with his doubts, was confirmed by Jesus as the greatest of the offspring of woman (Mt 11:2-15). Peter’s (and the other disciples’) perception was faulty, but Jesus affirms Peter’s confession as the foundation stone of the church. The synoptic Gospels portray the early faith of the disciples in all its limitations and weaknesses, yet it is still faith in that it is their positive response to Jesus’ word and work.<\/p>\n<h5>The Fourth Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>Faith is an especially significant concept in the Gospel of John (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>), though the word (in the Greek) occurs only as a verb. Quite often the reference has to do with the acceptance that something is true, that is, simple credence, or belief: “Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father in me” (Jn 14:11); “If you believed Moses, you would believe me” (Jn 5:46).<\/p>\n<p>Even more significant is the special expression “to believe into” in the sense of putting one’s trust into another. The particular form of the expression is without parallel before the fourth Gospel and may well express the strong sense of personal trust in the eternal Word made flesh. In John 3:16, whoever puts trust in him has eternal life. Those who put their trust in him are given power to become sons of God—to be born of God (Jn 1:12). They will never thirst (6:35); they will live, even though they die (11:25).<\/p>\n<p>In other places, John speaks of trust or faith in an absolute sense, that is, without referring to the one in whom trust is placed. In John 11:15 Jesus arrives after the death of Lazarus and is glad “in order that you might believe.” The outcome is going to be faith. Similarly, in the prologue (1:7), John the Baptist bears witness in order that through him all might believe. As Jesus satisfies the doubt of Thomas concerning the resurrection, he says, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe” (20:29). In these and other passages the fundamental outcome of Jesus’ witness to himself is trust.<\/p>\n<p>Faith and knowledge are closely related. In John 6:69 Peter says, “We have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God.” In his priestly prayer Jesus says that eternal life is to “know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent” (Jn 17:3). Also, God is seen through the eyes of faith. No one has ever seen God, but the Only Begotten has revealed him (1:18). He who has seen Jesus has seen the Father (14:9).<\/p>\n<p>To believe is also expressed in the verb “receive.” Those who receive Christ are given power to become the sons of God (Jn 1:12). Trust is that form of knowing or seeing by which the glory of God (1:14; 17:4) is made present.<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>In Paul’s letters (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>), he writes about faith from a number of angles. He sets faith over against “works of the law” as the only and true basis for righteousness (Rom 1–4; Gal 1–4) and appeals to Abraham to prove his point: “Abraham believed God and it was reckoned to him for righteousness” (Gn 15:6; cf. Rom 4:5; Gal 3:6). This is entirely apart from the law (Rom 3:21); righteousness is the gift of God through faith in Christ, specifically in his atoning work. Behind Paul’s conviction lies his awareness of the radical and pervasive sinfulness of humans that renders each one helpless. Humanity is dead in sin but is made alive by faith in the word and work of Jesus mediated through the gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Faith, then, is faith in Jesus Christ. The number of metaphors Paul employs to describe the consequences of faith is staggering. It is by faith that believers are justified (Rom 5:1), reconciled (2 Cor 5:18), redeemed (Eph 1:7), made alive (2:5), adopted into the family of God (Rom 8:15-16), re-created (2 Cor 5:17), transported into a new kingdom (Col 1:13), and set free (Gal 5:1). Faith is, for Paul, the <em>sine qua non<\/em> of every aspect of salvation, from the grace that convicts to the receiving of the full inheritance at the coming of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s letters, faith is bound up with love so that the great exponent of justification by faith becomes also the articulate exponent of distinctive Christian love. To say that faith is indispensable to salvation is only part of the truth, for faith expresses itself through love: “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is of any avail, but faith working through love” (Gal 5:6); “If I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing” (1 Cor 13:2). Love is both the genesis and the ultimate expression of faith. Hence, even for Paul there can be no <em>total<\/em> separation between faith and works. This love of which Paul speaks is the essential fruit of the Spirit through whom the life of faith is lived. Only by virtue of the indwelling Spirit does faith find expression in love.<\/p>\n<h5>General Epistles<\/h5>\n<p>James speaks of faith as being completed by works (Jas 2:22). He opposed that concept of faith that thinks primarily of creedal assent, of believing that something is true without acting upon it. James, like Paul, assumes the primacy of faith, but he is warning against those who would draw wrong conclusions. Faith apart from works is not faith; it is barren (v 20). The practical dimension of faith is the burden of much of this epistle.<\/p>\n<p>The writer of Hebrews recognizes that faith has always been characteristic of the people of God and their specially called leaders. Faith makes substantial what is otherwise nebulous and uncertain; it makes evidential what is not visible. By faith the people of God have a more certain ground for their lives and their actions than the world is able to discern (Heb 11:1). The great cloud of witnesses (12:1) bear testimony by their faith to the faithfulness of God.<\/p>\n<p>Faith is opened up by the Word of God, finds expression through the Holy Spirit who is given, and bears witness to the lordship of Jesus Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FAITH<\/h3>\n<p>Belief in that which has no tangible proof; trust in God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DefinitionofFaith\">Definition of Faith<\/p>\n<p>In the OT and NT, “faith” carries several meanings. It may mean simple trust in God or in the Word of God, and at other times faith almost becomes equivalent to active obedience. It may also find expression in the affirmation of a creedal statement. Thus, it also comes to mean the entire body of received Christian teaching or truth—“the truth.” In Colossians 2:7, the term suggests something to be accepted as a whole and embodied in personal life. In 2 Timothy 4:7, Paul witnesses to having “kept the faith.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FaithintheOldTestament\">Faith in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT also strongly emphasizes faith as confidence in God’s covenant or in the covenant God made with Abraham and his descendants. The call of Abraham and the promise that his descendants would be used in the history of redemption became the basis of the narratives of the OT, being seen as the working out of that covenant. Once the nation Israel was brought into being, God sustained and protected it. The exodus from Egypt is a prominent indication that God was at work restoring his people to the Promised Land. The obedience of the people of God as the proper expression of faith is seen clearly in the OT. Without seeing God, his people believed and obeyed him. Abraham left his native land to go into unknown territory. The people of Israel left Egypt following the leadership of God to a land they could not see. The promise of God gave them courage to possess the land promised to them. After the exodus, the covenant of Abraham was confirmed with the people of Israel by the sprinkling of blood (Ex 24:6-7). There was to be strict obedience to God’s commands as an expression of faith. This response of human faith to the Lord’s faithfulness was national and collective. There also were commands to, and instances of, personal faith.<\/p>\n<p>Not only the narrative and legal portions of the OT but also the poetic and prophetic writings emphasize faith. The Psalms abound in expressions of personal confidence in the Lord even in dark times. Habakkuk points out that “the righteous shall live by his faith” (Hb 2:4). From such instances it is clear that, as the Lord’s education of Israel proceeded, the matter of faith in God’s faithfulness became more and more a matter of individual and personal response, and it is in the Prophets that several ingredients—such as trust, obedience, fear, and certainty—blend into the understanding of such personal faith.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FaithintheNewTestament\">Faith in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>As over against the OT, where the accent is on the faithfulness of God, in the NT the emphasis is placed on the active, responding faith of the hearer to the promised, final revelation in the Messiah, Jesus. Both verb and noun regularly describe the adequate response of people to Jesus’ word and to the gospel.<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>The most striking feature of the synoptic Gospels (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>) is the use of faith without identifying its object: “If you have faith as a grain of mustard seed” (Mt 17:20); “When Jesus saw their faith” (Mk 2:5); “Your faith has saved you” (Lk 7:50). Jesus is portrayed as one who by his work and word opens the door to faith and makes faith possible. The question is not whether the faith is in Jesus or in the Father; the implication is undoubtedly both, but as with every true bearer of the Word of God, the eye of faith is turned to the One who sends.<\/p>\n<p>On more than one occasion, Jesus denies the request for a miracle to substantiate his words (Mt 12:38-39; 16:1-4). Faith is response to the Word alone without any supporting props. No sign is to be given but the sign of Jonah. In the story of the rich man and Lazarus (Lk 16:19-31), Jesus denies the request for the spectacular and insists that the hearer must respond to the word given to him (cf. Jn 20:29). The Word demands self-surrender and commitment. Hence, the very nature of the Word and of faith becomes an obstacle to the proud and the powerful.<\/p>\n<p>Faith is the medium by which the power of God is made visible. It moves mountains, heals the sick, and is the means of entrance into the kingdom. It may be mingled with doubt, as with the father who sought healing for his son (“I believe; help my unbelief!” [Mk 9:24]), or as with John the Baptist in prison, who, even with his doubts, was confirmed by Jesus as the greatest of the offspring of woman (Mt 11:2-15). Peter’s (and the other disciples’) perception was faulty, but Jesus affirms Peter’s confession as the foundation stone of the church. The synoptic Gospels portray the early faith of the disciples in all its limitations and weaknesses, yet it is still faith in that it is their positive response to Jesus’ word and work.<\/p>\n<h5>The Fourth Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>Faith is an especially significant concept in the Gospel of John (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>), though the word (in the Greek) occurs only as a verb. Quite often the reference has to do with the acceptance that something is true, that is, simple credence, or belief: “Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father in me” (Jn 14:11); “If you believed Moses, you would believe me” (Jn 5:46).<\/p>\n<p>Even more significant is the special expression “to believe into” in the sense of putting one’s trust into another. The particular form of the expression is without parallel before the fourth Gospel and may well express the strong sense of personal trust in the eternal Word made flesh. In John 3:16, whoever puts trust in him has eternal life. Those who put their trust in him are given power to become sons of God—to be born of God (Jn 1:12). They will never thirst (6:35); they will live, even though they die (11:25).<\/p>\n<p>In other places, John speaks of trust or faith in an absolute sense, that is, without referring to the one in whom trust is placed. In John 11:15 Jesus arrives after the death of Lazarus and is glad “in order that you might believe.” The outcome is going to be faith. Similarly, in the prologue (1:7), John the Baptist bears witness in order that through him all might believe. As Jesus satisfies the doubt of Thomas concerning the resurrection, he says, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe” (20:29). In these and other passages the fundamental outcome of Jesus’ witness to himself is trust.<\/p>\n<p>Faith and knowledge are closely related. In John 6:69 Peter says, “We have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God.” In his priestly prayer Jesus says that eternal life is to “know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent” (Jn 17:3). Also, God is seen through the eyes of faith. No one has ever seen God, but the Only Begotten has revealed him (1:18). He who has seen Jesus has seen the Father (14:9).<\/p>\n<p>To believe is also expressed in the verb “receive.” Those who receive Christ are given power to become the sons of God (Jn 1:12). Trust is that form of knowing or seeing by which the glory of God (1:14; 17:4) is made present.<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>In Paul’s letters (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>), he writes about faith from a number of angles. He sets faith over against “works of the law” as the only and true basis for righteousness (Rom 1–4; Gal 1–4) and appeals to Abraham to prove his point: “Abraham believed God and it was reckoned to him for righteousness” (Gn 15:6; cf. Rom 4:5; Gal 3:6). This is entirely apart from the law (Rom 3:21); righteousness is the gift of God through faith in Christ, specifically in his atoning work. Behind Paul’s conviction lies his awareness of the radical and pervasive sinfulness of humans that renders each one helpless. Humanity is dead in sin but is made alive by faith in the word and work of Jesus mediated through the gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Faith, then, is faith in Jesus Christ. The number of metaphors Paul employs to describe the consequences of faith is staggering. It is by faith that believers are justified (Rom 5:1), reconciled (2 Cor 5:18), redeemed (Eph 1:7), made alive (2:5), adopted into the family of God (Rom 8:15-16), re-created (2 Cor 5:17), transported into a new kingdom (Col 1:13), and set free (Gal 5:1). Faith is, for Paul, the <em>sine qua non<\/em> of every aspect of salvation, from the grace that convicts to the receiving of the full inheritance at the coming of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s letters, faith is bound up with love so that the great exponent of justification by faith becomes also the articulate exponent of distinctive Christian love. To say that faith is indispensable to salvation is only part of the truth, for faith expresses itself through love: “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is of any avail, but faith working through love” (Gal 5:6); “If I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing” (1 Cor 13:2). Love is both the genesis and the ultimate expression of faith. Hence, even for Paul there can be no <em>total<\/em> separation between faith and works. This love of which Paul speaks is the essential fruit of the Spirit through whom the life of faith is lived. Only by virtue of the indwelling Spirit does faith find expression in love.<\/p>\n<h5>General Epistles<\/h5>\n<p>James speaks of faith as being completed by works (Jas 2:22). He opposed that concept of faith that thinks primarily of creedal assent, of believing that something is true without acting upon it. James, like Paul, assumes the primacy of faith, but he is warning against those who would draw wrong conclusions. Faith apart from works is not faith; it is barren (v 20). The practical dimension of faith is the burden of much of this epistle.<\/p>\n<p>The writer of Hebrews recognizes that faith has always been characteristic of the people of God and their specially called leaders. Faith makes substantial what is otherwise nebulous and uncertain; it makes evidential what is not visible. By faith the people of God have a more certain ground for their lives and their actions than the world is able to discern (Heb 11:1). The great cloud of witnesses (12:1) bear testimony by their faith to the faithfulness of God.<\/p>\n<p>Faith is opened up by the Word of God, finds expression through the Holy Spirit who is given, and bears witness to the lordship of Jesus Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FAITH Belief in that which has no tangible proof; trust in God. Definition of Faith In the OT and NT, “faith” carries several meanings. It may mean simple trust in God or in the Word of God, and at other times faith almost becomes equivalent to active obedience. It may also find expression in the affirmation of a creedal statement. Thus, it also comes to mean the entire body of received Christian teaching or truth—“the truth.” In Colossians 2:7, the term suggests something to be accepted as a...","summary_en":"FAITH Belief in that which has no tangible proof; trust in God. Definition of Faith In the OT and NT, “faith” carries several meanings. It may mean simple trust in God or in the Word of God, and at other times faith almost becomes equivalent to active obedience. It may also find expression in the affirmation of a creedal statement. Thus, it also comes to mean the entire body of received Christian teaching or truth—“the truth.” In Colossians 2:7, the term suggests something to be accepted as a...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":23302,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Light","title_en":"Light","content_ro":"<h3>LIGHT<\/h3>\n<p>Illumination that makes sight possible.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Light is a many-sided concept in the OT. The term is often used of ordinary, sensible light, but it also speaks of communicating spiritual truth. Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gn 1:3). God also made individual lights such as the sun, moon, and stars (v 16). Sometimes light is personified, as when its inaccessibility is indicated by saying that it is impossible to reach the place where it lives (Jb 38:19; cf. v 24). There are also manufactured light sources, such as those used in the tabernacle (Ex 25:37).<\/p>\n<p>Light is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting, or what is associated with important people and more especially with God. “Light is pleasant,” says the preacher (Eccl 11:7). During one of the plagues in Egypt, the Egyptians were in thick darkness while the Israelites had light (Ex 10:23). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led in the wilderness by a pillar of cloud by day and of fire by night (13:21). The pillar gave them light when their enemies were in darkness (14:20). In later days Israel remembered that God did not abandon his people even when they sinned; the pillar of fire was always there to show them the right way (Neh 9:19; cf. Neh 9:12; Pss 78:14; 105:39).<\/p>\n<p>Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord. Job said, “He floods the darkness with light; he brings light to the deepest gloom” (Jb 12:22, <span>nlt<\/span>). In his time of trouble Job recalled earlier, better days: “I long for the years gone by when God took care of me, when he lighted the way before me and I walked safely through the darkness” (Jb 29:2-3, <span>nlt<\/span>). Similarly Eliphaz pictured the happiness that would befall Job if he would take Eliphaz’s advice: “Whatever you decide to do will be accomplished, and light will shine on the road ahead of you” (Jb 22:28, <span>nlt<\/span>). Eliphaz’s use of that expression shows what is commonly conveyed in his day. The psalmist counted it a blessing when God himself lighted his lamp (Pss 18:28; 118:27; cf. 97:11; 112:4).<\/p>\n<p>Light is closely linked with God; indeed, God can be said to be light: “No longer will you need the sun or moon to give you light, for the <span>Lord<\/span> your God will be your everlasting light, and he will be your glory. The sun will never set; the moon will not go down. For the <span>Lord<\/span> will be your everlasting light” (Is 60:19-20, <span>nlt<\/span>). The psalmist exulted, “The <span>Lord<\/span> is my light and my salvation” (Ps 27:1). God is said to be robed with light (104:2), and light dwells with him (Dn 2:22). Darkness is no problem to God; darkness and light are alike to him (Ps 139:12). Micah saw God as light and also as bringing his servants into the light (Mi 7:8-9). Both are ways of affirming that there is blessing and victory with God, so that a servant of God need never be dismayed.<\/p>\n<p>God’s blessing, described in terms of light, is also related to “the light of his presence.” Something of that expression’s meaning is seen from its use in Psalm 4:6: “Many people say, ‘Who will show us better times?’ Let the smile of your face shine on us, <span>Lord<\/span>” (<span>nlt<\/span>). The parallelism shows that “good” and the lifting up of the light of God’s countenance are much the same. Similarly, it was the light of God’s countenance that brought victory (Ps 44:3; here it is linked with God’s right hand and arm and his delight in his people). Those who walk in the light of God’s countenance are blessed (89:15). There is another side to that expression, for secret sins are exposed in his light (90:8). There is a close scrutiny from which no one and nothing can escape. But the predominant idea is that of the blessing that follows from God’s looking upon his people. On one occasion the phrase is used of a person showing favor to others (Jb 29:24). An extension of the Lord’s blessing is the light God gives to the world through his servants (Is 42:6; 49:6). God’s servants can guide others to the revelation and blessing of God.<\/p>\n<p>Light is associated with justice when the Lord says, “A law will go forth from me, and my justice for a light to the peoples” (Is 51:4, <span>rsv<\/span>). God’s light in that act of justice is a consuming fire. Sometimes light is connected with good behavior: “The path of the righteous is like the light of dawn, which shines brighter and brighter until full day” (Prv 4:18, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The OT uses the absence of light as a synonym for disaster. There are those who grope in the dark without light (Jb 12:25). Bildad saw the light of the wicked put out in punishment and death (18:5-17). The wicked will be “thrust from light into darkness” (v 18). In the aftermath of the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem there came the lament “He has brought me into deep darkness, shutting out all light” (Lam 3:2, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>New Testament references to light are often figurative. Thus, on the Damascus road, Saul of Tarsus encountered “a light from heaven” (Acts 9:3; cf. 22:6-11; 26:13). Was that light as we know it or something else? Likewise, what quality of light shone in the apostle Peter’s cell (12:7)? The light in the heavenly city is not the kind of illumination seen on earth, “for the Lord God will be their light” (Rv 22:5; cf. 21:11, 23-24).<\/p>\n<p>The association of God with light is recurrent in the NT. The apostle John wrote that “God is light and there is no darkness in him at all” (1 Jn 1:5, <span>nlt<\/span>). The apostle James referred to God as “the Father of lights” (Jas 1:17). Or God may be thought of as living in light, light that no person can approach (1 Tm 6:16; cf. 1 Jn 1:7). Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (Jn 8:12; see also 9:5), and “I have come as light into the world, that whoever believes in me may not remain in darkness” (Jn 12:46, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus told his followers to believe in the light while it was with them (v 35). Such passages emphasize that Christ brought a revelation from God, but he was more than a revealer. He was himself that revelation, according to the apostle John (Jn 1:1-10). John the Baptist came to bear witness to the light for the purpose of bringing people to believe (vv 7-8). Those who received Jesus, who believed in the light, received the right to become children of God (vv 9-12). Sometimes light is used to express the illumination that happens when people come to the knowledge of God and his salvation (Mt 4:16; Lk 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18).<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps thinking of a then-popular concept of a war between light and darkness, John wrote that the light shines in the darkness and adds that the darkness has not overcome it (Jn 1:5; cf. 1 Jn 2:8). John tells us that “the light from heaven came into the world, but they loved the darkness more than the light, for their actions were evil” (Jn 3:19, <span>nlt<\/span>). To love darkness brings condemnation, now and at the final judgment. John pointed out that evildoers keep away from the light; they do not want their evil exposed. But those who “do the truth” come to the light (vv 20-21). In John’s account of the raising of Lazarus, Jesus speaks of the possibility of walking without stumbling in the light of day, but then he goes on to the way a man stumbles in the night because he has no light (11:10). The lack of light “in” the man shows that it is a spiritual process with which Jesus is concerned and not with making physical progress by daylight. He who follows Jesus will have the light of life (8:12), which indicates what Jesus has in mind.<\/p>\n<p>Those who respond to the light may be characterized as “sons of light” (Jn 12:36). Their allegiance is to the light and their conduct has been shaped by this fact. The concept is not confined to John’s Gospel, for we also see it in Luke (Lk 16:8). We find it in Paul’s affirmation that the Thessalonian Christians are children of light and of the day, not of the night or darkness (1 Thes 5:5). John speaks of walking in the light (1 Jn 1:7) and sees the conduct of the Christian as aptly symbolized by light.<\/p>\n<p>This way of looking at the Christian’s manner of life reaches its high point in the words of Jesus to his followers: “You are the light of the world” (Mt 5:14), thus applying to them words that are also applied to himself. Of course, we are not the world’s light in the same sense as he is. When light refers to Christ, there is a reference to him as Savior and not merely as one who reveals great truths. When believers are called the light of the world, there is clearly no saving significance in the description: they do not accomplish the world’s salvation. But they do point it out. It is their function to live as redeemed people. They are to show the quality of life proper to the people of God and in this way act as light to the people of the world. They are to let their light shine before the world in such a way that people will see their good deeds and so come to praise God (not, be it noted, those who do the deeds, Mt 5:16). It is important for those in this position to make full use of the light they have. It is tragic when the light that is in them is darkness (Mt 6:23; Lk 11:35).<\/p>\n<p>This metaphor is worked out in a way not congenial to modern men and women, but the basic lesson is clear. Christians have been illuminated by the light that is Christ, who dwells within his people. If they ignore the illumination he brings and live like those in the dark, then indeed they are in deep darkness. They are worse than others because they know what light is and what it can mean to them, and have turned away from it.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Darkness.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LIGHT<\/h3>\n<p>Illumination that makes sight possible.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Light is a many-sided concept in the OT. The term is often used of ordinary, sensible light, but it also speaks of communicating spiritual truth. Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gn 1:3). God also made individual lights such as the sun, moon, and stars (v 16). Sometimes light is personified, as when its inaccessibility is indicated by saying that it is impossible to reach the place where it lives (Jb 38:19; cf. v 24). There are also manufactured light sources, such as those used in the tabernacle (Ex 25:37).<\/p>\n<p>Light is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting, or what is associated with important people and more especially with God. “Light is pleasant,” says the preacher (Eccl 11:7). During one of the plagues in Egypt, the Egyptians were in thick darkness while the Israelites had light (Ex 10:23). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led in the wilderness by a pillar of cloud by day and of fire by night (13:21). The pillar gave them light when their enemies were in darkness (14:20). In later days Israel remembered that God did not abandon his people even when they sinned; the pillar of fire was always there to show them the right way (Neh 9:19; cf. Neh 9:12; Pss 78:14; 105:39).<\/p>\n<p>Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord. Job said, “He floods the darkness with light; he brings light to the deepest gloom” (Jb 12:22, <span>nlt<\/span>). In his time of trouble Job recalled earlier, better days: “I long for the years gone by when God took care of me, when he lighted the way before me and I walked safely through the darkness” (Jb 29:2-3, <span>nlt<\/span>). Similarly Eliphaz pictured the happiness that would befall Job if he would take Eliphaz’s advice: “Whatever you decide to do will be accomplished, and light will shine on the road ahead of you” (Jb 22:28, <span>nlt<\/span>). Eliphaz’s use of that expression shows what is commonly conveyed in his day. The psalmist counted it a blessing when God himself lighted his lamp (Pss 18:28; 118:27; cf. 97:11; 112:4).<\/p>\n<p>Light is closely linked with God; indeed, God can be said to be light: “No longer will you need the sun or moon to give you light, for the <span>Lord<\/span> your God will be your everlasting light, and he will be your glory. The sun will never set; the moon will not go down. For the <span>Lord<\/span> will be your everlasting light” (Is 60:19-20, <span>nlt<\/span>). The psalmist exulted, “The <span>Lord<\/span> is my light and my salvation” (Ps 27:1). God is said to be robed with light (104:2), and light dwells with him (Dn 2:22). Darkness is no problem to God; darkness and light are alike to him (Ps 139:12). Micah saw God as light and also as bringing his servants into the light (Mi 7:8-9). Both are ways of affirming that there is blessing and victory with God, so that a servant of God need never be dismayed.<\/p>\n<p>God’s blessing, described in terms of light, is also related to “the light of his presence.” Something of that expression’s meaning is seen from its use in Psalm 4:6: “Many people say, ‘Who will show us better times?’ Let the smile of your face shine on us, <span>Lord<\/span>” (<span>nlt<\/span>). The parallelism shows that “good” and the lifting up of the light of God’s countenance are much the same. Similarly, it was the light of God’s countenance that brought victory (Ps 44:3; here it is linked with God’s right hand and arm and his delight in his people). Those who walk in the light of God’s countenance are blessed (89:15). There is another side to that expression, for secret sins are exposed in his light (90:8). There is a close scrutiny from which no one and nothing can escape. But the predominant idea is that of the blessing that follows from God’s looking upon his people. On one occasion the phrase is used of a person showing favor to others (Jb 29:24). An extension of the Lord’s blessing is the light God gives to the world through his servants (Is 42:6; 49:6). God’s servants can guide others to the revelation and blessing of God.<\/p>\n<p>Light is associated with justice when the Lord says, “A law will go forth from me, and my justice for a light to the peoples” (Is 51:4, <span>rsv<\/span>). God’s light in that act of justice is a consuming fire. Sometimes light is connected with good behavior: “The path of the righteous is like the light of dawn, which shines brighter and brighter until full day” (Prv 4:18, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The OT uses the absence of light as a synonym for disaster. There are those who grope in the dark without light (Jb 12:25). Bildad saw the light of the wicked put out in punishment and death (18:5-17). The wicked will be “thrust from light into darkness” (v 18). In the aftermath of the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem there came the lament “He has brought me into deep darkness, shutting out all light” (Lam 3:2, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>New Testament references to light are often figurative. Thus, on the Damascus road, Saul of Tarsus encountered “a light from heaven” (Acts 9:3; cf. 22:6-11; 26:13). Was that light as we know it or something else? Likewise, what quality of light shone in the apostle Peter’s cell (12:7)? The light in the heavenly city is not the kind of illumination seen on earth, “for the Lord God will be their light” (Rv 22:5; cf. 21:11, 23-24).<\/p>\n<p>The association of God with light is recurrent in the NT. The apostle John wrote that “God is light and there is no darkness in him at all” (1 Jn 1:5, <span>nlt<\/span>). The apostle James referred to God as “the Father of lights” (Jas 1:17). Or God may be thought of as living in light, light that no person can approach (1 Tm 6:16; cf. 1 Jn 1:7). Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (Jn 8:12; see also 9:5), and “I have come as light into the world, that whoever believes in me may not remain in darkness” (Jn 12:46, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus told his followers to believe in the light while it was with them (v 35). Such passages emphasize that Christ brought a revelation from God, but he was more than a revealer. He was himself that revelation, according to the apostle John (Jn 1:1-10). John the Baptist came to bear witness to the light for the purpose of bringing people to believe (vv 7-8). Those who received Jesus, who believed in the light, received the right to become children of God (vv 9-12). Sometimes light is used to express the illumination that happens when people come to the knowledge of God and his salvation (Mt 4:16; Lk 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18).<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps thinking of a then-popular concept of a war between light and darkness, John wrote that the light shines in the darkness and adds that the darkness has not overcome it (Jn 1:5; cf. 1 Jn 2:8). John tells us that “the light from heaven came into the world, but they loved the darkness more than the light, for their actions were evil” (Jn 3:19, <span>nlt<\/span>). To love darkness brings condemnation, now and at the final judgment. John pointed out that evildoers keep away from the light; they do not want their evil exposed. But those who “do the truth” come to the light (vv 20-21). In John’s account of the raising of Lazarus, Jesus speaks of the possibility of walking without stumbling in the light of day, but then he goes on to the way a man stumbles in the night because he has no light (11:10). The lack of light “in” the man shows that it is a spiritual process with which Jesus is concerned and not with making physical progress by daylight. He who follows Jesus will have the light of life (8:12), which indicates what Jesus has in mind.<\/p>\n<p>Those who respond to the light may be characterized as “sons of light” (Jn 12:36). Their allegiance is to the light and their conduct has been shaped by this fact. The concept is not confined to John’s Gospel, for we also see it in Luke (Lk 16:8). We find it in Paul’s affirmation that the Thessalonian Christians are children of light and of the day, not of the night or darkness (1 Thes 5:5). John speaks of walking in the light (1 Jn 1:7) and sees the conduct of the Christian as aptly symbolized by light.<\/p>\n<p>This way of looking at the Christian’s manner of life reaches its high point in the words of Jesus to his followers: “You are the light of the world” (Mt 5:14), thus applying to them words that are also applied to himself. Of course, we are not the world’s light in the same sense as he is. When light refers to Christ, there is a reference to him as Savior and not merely as one who reveals great truths. When believers are called the light of the world, there is clearly no saving significance in the description: they do not accomplish the world’s salvation. But they do point it out. It is their function to live as redeemed people. They are to show the quality of life proper to the people of God and in this way act as light to the people of the world. They are to let their light shine before the world in such a way that people will see their good deeds and so come to praise God (not, be it noted, those who do the deeds, Mt 5:16). It is important for those in this position to make full use of the light they have. It is tragic when the light that is in them is darkness (Mt 6:23; Lk 11:35).<\/p>\n<p>This metaphor is worked out in a way not congenial to modern men and women, but the basic lesson is clear. Christians have been illuminated by the light that is Christ, who dwells within his people. If they ignore the illumination he brings and live like those in the dark, then indeed they are in deep darkness. They are worse than others because they know what light is and what it can mean to them, and have turned away from it.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Darkness.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LIGHT Illumination that makes sight possible. In the Old Testament Light is a many-sided concept in the OT. The term is often used of ordinary, sensible light, but it also speaks of communicating spiritual truth. Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gn 1:3). God also made individual lights such as the sun, moon, and stars (v 16). Sometimes light is personified, as when its inaccessibility is indicated by saying that it is impossible to reach the place where it li...","summary_en":"LIGHT Illumination that makes sight possible. In the Old Testament Light is a many-sided concept in the OT. The term is often used of ordinary, sensible light, but it also speaks of communicating spiritual truth. Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gn 1:3). God also made individual lights such as the sun, moon, and stars (v 16). Sometimes light is personified, as when its inaccessibility is indicated by saying that it is impossible to reach the place where it li...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":38528,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Witness","title_en":"Witness","content_ro":"<h3>WITNESS<\/h3>\n<p>One who tells what he or she has seen or personally experienced, often in a court of law. The term may also refer to the testimony the person has given.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WitnessintheOldTestament\">Witness in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the judicial procedure outlined in the OT, one witness was not adequate for personal testimony against anyone, but two or three witnesses were required (Dt 17:6; 19:15). This principle was incorporated into Jewish law and is reiterated in the NT (cf. Mt 18:16; 2 Cor 13:1).<\/p>\n<p>The truth of testimony is so important that the Bible expressly forbids false witness in the ninth commandment (Ex 20:16; Dt 5:20; cf. Mk 10:19; Lk 18:20). The practical wisdom of Proverbs speaks out frequently against the false witness (e.g., Prv 6:19; 14:5; 25:18). Nevertheless, false witnesses did arise (Pss 27:12; 35:11), and there are notable examples of the bringing of more than one witness in order to bring about the death of an innocent person. The case of Naboth and his vineyard is notorious; here Jezebel, wife of King Ahab, bribed two men to bear false witness against Naboth so that he would be stoned to death and her wicked husband could take the vineyard he coveted so intensely (1 Kgs 21).<\/p>\n<p>Witnesses could be tested by the judges. If the testimony of an accuser was found to be false, that person was subjected to the punishment he had sought to have executed on the defendant (Dt 19:16-21). Proverbs also speaks of the punishment of the false witness (Prv 19:5, 9; 21:28).<\/p>\n<p>The OT records several accounts of legal proceedings in which witnesses are mentioned. Most of these involve the purchase or transfer of property. Ruth 4:7-12 relates the redemption of a field from Naomi by Boaz. Isaiah found “reliable witnesses” concerning a property title written on a large tablet (Is 8:1-2). To confirm the prophecy of the return of the exiles from Babylon, Jeremiah bought and paid for a field in the presence of witnesses, who also signed the deed for the property (Jer 32:6-15).<\/p>\n<p>At the conclusion of his farewell message at Shechem, Joshua declared that the Israelites themselves were witnesses that they had chosen to serve the Lord; then he set up a large stone and declared that it also was a witness (Jos 24:22-27). The people of Israel themselves were declared God’s witnesses (Is 43:10; 44:8-9). They were witnesses to the existence of God, to his uniqueness, holiness, power, and love. When they failed to acknowledge his uniqueness and holiness and turned to idolatry, he sent them into captivity, as he had warned, for they had failed in their witness and had given opportunity for the enemies of God to blaspheme.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WitnessintheNewTestament\">Witness in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the various words for witness are mainly related to the verb <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">martureo<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “to bear witness, be a witness.” The word “martyr” shows the ultimate form of witness in that Christians have sacrificed their lives because of their witness for Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>John the Baptist was both a witness and a martyr. As the forerunner of the Messiah, his mission was to bear witness to the light and to identify the Lamb of God (Jn 1:7-8, 19-36). The followers of Jesus, and particularly the 12 apostles, were witnesses to the person and character of Jesus. They knew him intimately, heard his teachings and observed his miracles; three were witnesses of his transfiguration (Mt 17:1-2; 2 Pt 1:17-18) and many were witnesses to his resurrection (Lk 24:48; 1 Cor 15:4-8). At the time of his ascension, the disciples were specifically commissioned to be his witnesses (Acts 1:8).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>WITNESS<\/h3>\n<p>One who tells what he or she has seen or personally experienced, often in a court of law. The term may also refer to the testimony the person has given.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WitnessintheOldTestament\">Witness in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the judicial procedure outlined in the OT, one witness was not adequate for personal testimony against anyone, but two or three witnesses were required (Dt 17:6; 19:15). This principle was incorporated into Jewish law and is reiterated in the NT (cf. Mt 18:16; 2 Cor 13:1).<\/p>\n<p>The truth of testimony is so important that the Bible expressly forbids false witness in the ninth commandment (Ex 20:16; Dt 5:20; cf. Mk 10:19; Lk 18:20). The practical wisdom of Proverbs speaks out frequently against the false witness (e.g., Prv 6:19; 14:5; 25:18). Nevertheless, false witnesses did arise (Pss 27:12; 35:11), and there are notable examples of the bringing of more than one witness in order to bring about the death of an innocent person. The case of Naboth and his vineyard is notorious; here Jezebel, wife of King Ahab, bribed two men to bear false witness against Naboth so that he would be stoned to death and her wicked husband could take the vineyard he coveted so intensely (1 Kgs 21).<\/p>\n<p>Witnesses could be tested by the judges. If the testimony of an accuser was found to be false, that person was subjected to the punishment he had sought to have executed on the defendant (Dt 19:16-21). Proverbs also speaks of the punishment of the false witness (Prv 19:5, 9; 21:28).<\/p>\n<p>The OT records several accounts of legal proceedings in which witnesses are mentioned. Most of these involve the purchase or transfer of property. Ruth 4:7-12 relates the redemption of a field from Naomi by Boaz. Isaiah found “reliable witnesses” concerning a property title written on a large tablet (Is 8:1-2). To confirm the prophecy of the return of the exiles from Babylon, Jeremiah bought and paid for a field in the presence of witnesses, who also signed the deed for the property (Jer 32:6-15).<\/p>\n<p>At the conclusion of his farewell message at Shechem, Joshua declared that the Israelites themselves were witnesses that they had chosen to serve the Lord; then he set up a large stone and declared that it also was a witness (Jos 24:22-27). The people of Israel themselves were declared God’s witnesses (Is 43:10; 44:8-9). They were witnesses to the existence of God, to his uniqueness, holiness, power, and love. When they failed to acknowledge his uniqueness and holiness and turned to idolatry, he sent them into captivity, as he had warned, for they had failed in their witness and had given opportunity for the enemies of God to blaspheme.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WitnessintheNewTestament\">Witness in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the various words for witness are mainly related to the verb <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">martureo<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “to bear witness, be a witness.” The word “martyr” shows the ultimate form of witness in that Christians have sacrificed their lives because of their witness for Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>John the Baptist was both a witness and a martyr. As the forerunner of the Messiah, his mission was to bear witness to the light and to identify the Lamb of God (Jn 1:7-8, 19-36). The followers of Jesus, and particularly the 12 apostles, were witnesses to the person and character of Jesus. They knew him intimately, heard his teachings and observed his miracles; three were witnesses of his transfiguration (Mt 17:1-2; 2 Pt 1:17-18) and many were witnesses to his resurrection (Lk 24:48; 1 Cor 15:4-8). At the time of his ascension, the disciples were specifically commissioned to be his witnesses (Acts 1:8).<\/p>","summary_ro":"WITNESS One who tells what he or she has seen or personally experienced, often in a court of law. The term may also refer to the testimony the person has given. Witness in the Old Testament In the judicial procedure outlined in the OT, one witness was not adequate for personal testimony against anyone, but two or three witnesses were required (Dt 17:6; 19:15). This principle was incorporated into Jewish law and is reiterated in the NT (cf. Mt 18:16; 2 Cor 13:1). The truth of testimony is so i...","summary_en":"WITNESS One who tells what he or she has seen or personally experienced, often in a court of law. The term may also refer to the testimony the person has given. Witness in the Old Testament In the judicial procedure outlined in the OT, one witness was not adequate for personal testimony against anyone, but two or three witnesses were required (Dt 17:6; 19:15). This principle was incorporated into Jewish law and is reiterated in the NT (cf. Mt 18:16; 2 Cor 13:1). The truth of testimony is so i...","source":"Articles\/W.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"8":[{"id":56312,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:8","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:8","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:8<\/strong> Some Jews speculated that John the Baptist was the Messiah; some of his followers were even reluctant to follow Jesus (3:22-30). However, John the Baptist <em>was not the light<\/em><em>;<\/em> his role was to announce Jesus (1:19-34).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:8<\/strong> Some Jews speculated that John the Baptist was the Messiah; some of his followers were even reluctant to follow Jesus (3:22-30). However, John the Baptist <em>was not the light<\/em><em>;<\/em> his role was to announce Jesus (1:19-34).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:8 Some Jews speculated that John the Baptist was the Messiah; some of his followers were even reluctant to follow Jesus (3:22-30). However, John the Baptist was not the light; his role was to announce Jesus (1:19-34).","summary_en":"1:8 Some Jews speculated that John the Baptist was the Messiah; some of his followers were even reluctant to follow Jesus (3:22-30). However, John the Baptist was not the light; his role was to announce Jesus (1:19-34).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83938,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:8","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:8","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:8<\/strong> Some Jews speculated that John the Baptist was the Messiah; some of his followers were even reluctant to follow Jesus (3:22-30). However, John the Baptist <em>was not the light<\/em><em>;<\/em> his role was to announce Jesus (1:19-34).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:8<\/strong> Some Jews speculated that John the Baptist was the Messiah; some of his followers were even reluctant to follow Jesus (3:22-30). However, John the Baptist <em>was not the light<\/em><em>;<\/em> his role was to announce Jesus (1:19-34).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:8 Some Jews speculated that John the Baptist was the Messiah; some of his followers were even reluctant to follow Jesus (3:22-30). However, John the Baptist was not the light; his role was to announce Jesus (1:19-34).","summary_en":"1:8 Some Jews speculated that John the Baptist was the Messiah; some of his followers were even reluctant to follow Jesus (3:22-30). However, John the Baptist was not the light; his role was to announce Jesus (1:19-34).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111564,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:8","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:8","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:8<\/strong> Some Jews speculated that John the Baptist was the Messiah; some of his followers were even reluctant to follow Jesus (3:22-30). However, John the Baptist <em>was not the light<\/em><em>;<\/em> his role was to announce Jesus (1:19-34).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:8<\/strong> Some Jews speculated that John the Baptist was the Messiah; some of his followers were even reluctant to follow Jesus (3:22-30). However, John the Baptist <em>was not the light<\/em><em>;<\/em> his role was to announce Jesus (1:19-34).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:8 Some Jews speculated that John the Baptist was the Messiah; some of his followers were even reluctant to follow Jesus (3:22-30). However, John the Baptist was not the light; his role was to announce Jesus (1:19-34).","summary_en":"1:8 Some Jews speculated that John the Baptist was the Messiah; some of his followers were even reluctant to follow Jesus (3:22-30). However, John the Baptist was not the light; his role was to announce Jesus (1:19-34).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139190,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:8","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:8","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:8<\/strong> Some Jews speculated that John the Baptist was the Messiah; some of his followers were even reluctant to follow Jesus (3:22-30). However, John the Baptist <em>was not the light<\/em><em>;<\/em> his role was to announce Jesus (1:19-34).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:8<\/strong> Some Jews speculated that John the Baptist was the Messiah; some of his followers were even reluctant to follow Jesus (3:22-30). However, John the Baptist <em>was not the light<\/em><em>;<\/em> his role was to announce Jesus (1:19-34).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:8 Some Jews speculated that John the Baptist was the Messiah; some of his followers were even reluctant to follow Jesus (3:22-30). However, John the Baptist was not the light; his role was to announce Jesus (1:19-34).","summary_en":"1:8 Some Jews speculated that John the Baptist was the Messiah; some of his followers were even reluctant to follow Jesus (3:22-30). However, John the Baptist was not the light; his role was to announce Jesus (1:19-34).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"9":[{"id":20201,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel of John","title_en":"Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>JOHN, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>The fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospels. (See discussion above on John, the Apostle.)<\/p>\n\n<p>The Gospel appears to have been written by one who knew the Jews and the Palestine of Jesus’ day well. He was familiar with Jewish messianic expectations (e.g., Jn 1:20-21; 4:25; 7:40-42; 12:34). He knew of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9) and the contempt the Pharisees had for “the people of the land” (7:49). He knew of the importance attached to the religious schools (v 15). He knew the way the Sabbath was observed and was aware of the provision that the obligation to circumcise on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath regulations (vv 22-23). Throughout the Gospel he moved with certainty in the vast range of Jewish ideas and customs.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same with topography. The writer mentioned many places, and his place-names all seem to be used correctly. He referred to Cana, a village not mentioned in any earlier literature known to us, which means that the reference almost certainly came from someone who actually knew the place. He located Bethany with some precision as about 15 stadia from Jerusalem (about 2 miles, or 3.2 kilometers, 11:18). He had several references to places in or near Jerusalem, such as Bethesda (5:2), Siloam (9:7), and the Kidron Valley (18:1). Of course, this does not rule out some contemporary of John’s, but it makes it difficult to think of the author as a much later individual writing at a distance from Palestine. The evidence as we have it indicates that the writer was a Jew in the Palestine of Jesus’ day.<\/p>\n<p>To many careful readers, it seems that the Gospel bears the stamp of an eyewitness. For example, Jesus was teaching “in the treasury” (8:20). Nothing is made of the point; the incident could easily have been told without it. It looks like a reminiscence of someone who sees the scene in his mind’s eye as he writes. The fact that the house was filled with fragrance when the woman broke the perfume jar (12:3) does not materially affect the account but is the kind of detail that one who was there would remember. The author noted that the loaves used in the feeding of the multitude were barley loaves (6:9) and that Jesus’ tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top to bottom (19:23). He told us that the branches with which Jesus was greeted were palm branches (12:13), and that it was night when Judas went out (13:30). Such touches are found throughout the Gospel, and it seems unjustified to treat them as no more than an attempt to create verisimilitude. They seem much more like indications that the author was writing about events in which he had himself taken part.<\/p>\n<p>The early church accepted Johannine authorship without question. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all see the apostle as the author. The first to quote this Gospel by name was Theophilus of Antioch, about <span>AD<\/span> 180.<\/p>\n<p>Those who object to Johannine authorship emphasize the differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics. The argument is that if Jesus was anything like the Christ portrayed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he could not be like the Christ of the fourth Gospel. This is a completely subjective argument, ignoring the fact that any great man will appear differently to different people. The judgment of the church throughout the centuries has been that Jesus was large enough to inspire both portraits. To put the same point another way, we have no reason for holding that the first three Evangelists tell us all there is to know about Jesus. There is no contradiction. John simply brings out other aspects of Jesus’ life and teachings.<\/p>\n<p>While we cannot prove beyond all doubt that John the apostle was the author, we can say that there is more reason for holding to this view than to any other.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>It has been usual for conservatives and liberals alike to date this writing in the last decade of the first century or early in the second. Some liberal scholars have put it well into the second century, but this is not common, and it is remarkable that there has been such a considerable measure of agreement.<\/p>\n<p>It is said that this Gospel is dependent on the Synoptics, which means that it must be dated sometime after them. But this argument has been widely abandoned in recent times. There is so much in John that is without parallel in the other three Gospels, and conversely so much in the other three that John might have used had he known it, that it is very difficult indeed to hold that this writer had any of the other Gospels before him when he wrote, or even that he had read them. Such resemblances as there are seem better explained by common use of oral tradition.<\/p>\n<p>It is also argued that there is a very developed theology in John and that we must allow time for its development. Granted, the theology of this Gospel is profound, but this does not require that we must wait for it until the end of the first century. The theology of the Letter to the Romans is also profound, and there is no reason for dating that writing later than the 50s. On the ground of development, then, there is no reason for putting John later than Romans. Development is a slippery argument at best, for it usually takes place at uneven rates, and we have no means of knowing how fast it took place in the area where the author lived.<\/p>\n<p>Other arguments for a late date are no more conclusive. For example, it is urged that the ecclesiastical system presupposed by the Gospel is too late for the time of the apostle John, and that the sacramental system of chapters 3 and 6 must have taken time to develop. But John does not mention any sacrament. It is true that many scholars think these chapters refer to baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but the fact is that John mentions neither.<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising in view of the way the traditional arguments have crumbled away that many in recent times are arguing that John must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70. If it were later, why does not John have some reference to it? Some of his language appears to be earlier. In 5:2 he says there “is” (not “was”) a pool called Bethesda. And he often refers to the Twelve as Jesus’ disciples, or “his” disciples, or the like. In later times Christians usually said “the” disciples, for they saw no need to say whose the disciples were. But in the early days, when Christians were in contact with rabbis (each of whom had his disciples), it was important to show that Jesus’ disciples were in mind. It is important also that John makes no reference to any of the synoptic Gospels. The simplest explanation is that he had not seen them. They were not yet widely circulated.<\/p>\n<p>None of this enables us to date this Gospel with precision. But the weight of evidence points to an early date (before <span>AD<\/span> 70).<\/p>\n<p>The author was John the apostle, a Jew. However, the writing gives evidence of contact with Greek thought, for example, in the reference to Christ as “the Word” in chapter 1 and the translation of words like “rabbi” (1:38). It is almost universally held that such considerations compel us to see the work as originating in a center of Greek culture, and Ephesus has traditionally been favored. Before the end of the second century we have Irenaeus writing that John published the Gospel during his residence at Ephesus.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to similarities between John and the Odes of Solomon, which they think came from Syria. As there are also some resemblances in the language of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, this is held to show that John was written in Syria, probably at Antioch. Others again think that Egypt was the place, and they support this by pointing out that the oldest fragment of a manuscript of this Gospel was found there. There is no real evidence, and we are left with probabilities. There is much to be said for accepting the evidence of Irenaeus and seeing Ephesus as the place of origin, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>There is no real indication of the intended destination. From 20:31 we learn that the book was written that the readers might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and that by believing they might have life. The Gospel, then, has an evangelistic aim. But it is also possible that “believe” means “keep on believing”—“go on in faith,” rather than “begin to believe.” That is to say, the book may have been meant from the beginning to build people up in the faith. Probably we should not distinguish between these aims too sharply. Both may well be in mind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Several possible backgrounds to the Gospel have been suggested. The Greek interest is obvious, and this writing has sometimes been called the Gospel of the Hellenists. The suggestion is that we should look to Greek writings, perhaps the works of the philosophers or Philo of Alexandria, to find the right background against which to understand what John has written. This approach may be seen in the work of Rudolf Bultmann, who thought specifically of Gnosticism. Indeed, for Bultmann one of the sources of this Gospel was a discourse source that he thought was taken from non-Christian Gnosticism. Not many have been prepared to follow Bultmann, but a number of recent commentators have discerned some form of Gnosticism as the backdrop to John.<\/p>\n<p>While such views are put forward seriously, there are some substantial objections. One is that, despite the confident assertions of some scholars, Gnosticism has never been shown to be earlier than Christianity. In the form in which it comes before us in history, it is a Christian heresy, and of course, the Christian faith must appear before a Christian heresy is possible. Another objection is that there is a basic difference between the two systems. Gnosticism is concerned with knowledge (the very word is derived from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>,<\/em> “knowledge”). Its “redeemer” is one who comes from heaven with knowledge. But John does not subscribe to the view that man is saved by knowledge. The Redeemer comes to take away the sin of the world (1:29). Gnosticism tells people that life is an upward struggle; Christianity tells of a Savior who came down to raise them up. It is not easy to see any form of Gnosticism as the essential background to Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Much more significant is John’s Semitic background. Especially important here is the OT, accepted as sacred Scripture by Jew and Christian alike. It lies constantly behind John’s statements, and it must be studied carefully if John is to be understood. It is plain that John knew and loved the Septuagint, the translation into Greek of the Hebrew OT. Again and again, the Septuagint can be shown to lie behind what John says.<\/p>\n<p>In modern times important discoveries have been made at Qumran, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. Among the scrolls unearthed in the caves of this area are several that have affinities with John. Indeed, one of the interesting facts about the scrolls is that they have more parallels with John than with any other part of the NT, a fact difficult to explain if John was written late and at a distance from Palestine. The resemblances to the Qumran writings must be viewed with care, for there is often a linguistic resemblance where the thinking is quite different. For example, both use the unusual expression “the Spirit of truth.” But where John means one of the persons of the Trinity, the scrolls speak of “a spirit of truth” and “a spirit of error” striving in the souls of people. The connection is real, but John is clearly not dependent on the scrolls for his thinking. The contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they afford additional evidence that this Gospel is basically Palestinian and must be understood against a background of first-century Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Other backgrounds have been suggested, such as the Hermetic literature. This is a group of writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus (“Hermes Thrice-greatest”), a designation of the Egyptian god Thoth. There are indeed some points of contact with John, but they are few in comparison with those of writings rooted in Palestine. It is difficult to take such suggestions seriously. John is essentially Palestinian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The writer told us that Jesus did many “signs” (or miracles) that he had not recorded, but “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life” (Jn 20:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). John wrote to show that Jesus is the Messiah. But he did not do this simply with a view to conveying interesting information. He wanted his readers to see this knowledge as a challenge to faith; when they believe, they will have life. John sought to bring men and women to Christ; he had an evangelistic aim. That does not exhaust what he was trying to do, for his words have meaning for believers. It is important that believers have a right knowledge of Jesus and that they continue to believe.<\/p>\n<p>The main theological teaching of this Gospel, then, is that God has sent his Messiah, Jesus. He is the very Son of God, and he comes to bring life (3:16). Though Jesus told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, this is not often said so specifically. The avoidance of the term might well be because of the political overtones it had acquired among the Jews at large. They looked for a Messiah who would fight the Romans. He would defeat them and set up a mighty world empire with its capital in Jerusalem. Jesus was not aiming at anything like that, and it was important that he avoid the kind of language that would give that impression. But though the conventional messianic terminology is avoided, John left no doubt that Jesus was God’s chosen one. Again and again he depicted Jesus as fulfilling messianic functions. For example, in the long discourse in chapter 6 we see Jesus as the bread from heaven, fulfilling the expectation that when Messiah came, he would renew the manna; and in the giving of sight to the blind man (ch 9) we have another messianic function (cf. Is 35:5).<\/p>\n<p>With this greatness of Jesus, John also combined teaching about his lowliness. A continuing, though unobtrusive, strand of Johannine teaching is that Jesus depends on the Father for everything. Apart from the Father, Jesus said, he could do nothing (Jn 5:30). His very food is to do the Father’s will (4:34). He lives through the Father (6:57). It is the Father who gives him his disciples (6:37, 44; 17:6). It is the Father who bears witness to him (5:32, 37). John insists that Jesus is in no sense independent of the Father. In the mission of Jesus, John sees the working out of the purpose of the Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue and Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>John begins with a prologue (1:1-18) that is unlike anything in any of the other Gospels. In it he refers to Jesus as “the Word,” a term that has points of contact with both Greek and Hebrew thinking. As John uses it, it conveys the thought that Jesus is the expression of the mind of the Father. John speaks of the Word as God (1:1), sees him as active in creation (1:3-5), goes on to the witness borne to him by John the Baptist (1:6-8), speaks of the coming of the Word into the world (1:9-14), and finishes with a section on the greatness of the Word (1:15-18). In this prologue he briefly introduces some of the great themes that will be developed throughout the Gospel. It is a majestic introduction to the whole.<\/p>\n<p>Next we have the beginnings of Jesus’ public ministry (1:19-51). Jesus’ work was preceded by that of John the Baptist, and the Evangelist tells us first about the kind of witness that the Baptist gave to Jesus. Witness is one of his important concepts, and witness is all that John the Baptist does in this Gospel. From this witness we move to the way the first disciples came to Jesus. We learn something of how Andrew and Peter came to know the Lord. We read also of Philip and Nathanael, of whom we learn little or nothing in the other Gospels.<\/p>\n<h5>The Signs and Discourses (2:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The public ministry of Jesus is described in a very distinctive way in this Gospel. John has a long section (chs 2–12) in which he tells of a number of miracles Jesus did, interweaving into his account a series of discourses. Sometimes these are addresses given to groups of people, and sometimes they are talks with individuals. Some scholars call this section of the Gospel the Book of Signs, thus emphasizing the prominent place given to seven miracles. For John they are not simply wonders. They are meaningful; in the literal sense of the term they are <em>sign<\/em>ificant.<\/p>\n<p>The first of them is the turning of the water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee (2:1-11). The water in question is connected with Jewish rites of purification (v 6), and the story is surely to teach us that Jesus transforms life. He changes the water of the law into the wine of the gospel. As a result of this “sign,” his disciples believed in him (v 11). John went on to tell how Jesus went up to Jerusalem and drove the traders out of the temple. They were selling animals for sacrifice and changing money. But their business was being done in the Court of the Gentiles, the only place in the temple where a Gentile could come to meditate and pray.<\/p>\n<p>The first discourse is on the new birth (3:1-21). Jesus talked with Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, about the necessity for radical renewal if one is to enter the kingdom. Jesus was speaking of God’s regenerating activity, not some human reformation. Following this, John records a dispute between some of John’s disciples with a Jew on the subject of purification. This opens the way for a section that shows the superiority of Jesus over John the Baptist—by the Baptist’s own confession (3:22-36).<\/p>\n<p>The second discourse is really a long conversation Jesus had with the woman of Samaria, whom he met by a well (4:1-42). It turns on “the water of life,” a term that is not fully explained in this chapter but which we later find points to the life-giving Spirit (7:38-39). This leads to the story of the second sign, the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54), notable for the fact that Jesus healed at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>The third sign is the healing of the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (5:1-18). This man had spent many years waiting for healing at the moving of the water. Jesus told him to get up and walk, and he did. Because it was done on a Sabbath, the Pharisees objected. This leads to Jesus’ third discourse, that on the divine Son (5:19-47). Here the closeness of the relationship of Jesus to the Father is stressed, and his place in the judgment is brought out. There is emphasis also on the variety of witness who encountered Jesus, which shows how reasonable it is to accept him as God’s own Son.<\/p>\n<p>John’s fourth sign is the one miracle (apart from the resurrection) found in all four Gospels: the feeding of the 5,000 (6:1-15). It is followed by Jesus’ walking on water (vv 16-21), which seems to be meant as the fifth sign (though some scholars think not; if they are right, there are only six signs). Then comes the fourth discourse, the great sermon on the bread of life (vv 22-59). Jesus is this bread, which he gives to all men and women who believe in him. There are references to eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv 50-58), which point to his death. Some have seen in them a reference to Communion, but it is hard to see why Jesus should refer in this way to an as-yet-nonexistent sacrament. Moreover, much the same effect is attributed in the same discourse to believing (vv 35, 47). It seems best to understand Jesus as meaning that people must believe in him as the one who would die for them in order for them to have life.<\/p>\n<p>There is a section detailing Peter’s affirmation of loyalty in the face of some who drifted away from the Master (6:67-71). Then we come to the fifth discourse, on the life-giving Spirit (7:1-52). John has an important explanatory point of his own when he tells us that at the time the Spirit had not been given because Jesus had not yet been glorified (v 39). The fullness of the Spirit depends on the completion of the work of Christ in his death and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The sixth discourse tells of the light of the world (8:12-59). This aspect of Jesus’ person and ministry is dramatically brought out in the sixth sign, the healing of the man born blind (ch 9). It is a lively narrative, as the healed man conducts a spirited defense against the Pharisees who belittled Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most beautiful of all the illustrations of Jesus’ relations to his people is that on which he dwells in the seventh discourse, where he speaks of himself as the good shepherd (ch 10). There is the obvious truth that sheep depend entirely on their shepherd, but Jesus says something else. Whereas earthly shepherds live to meet the needs of their sheep, Jesus laid down his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The final sign is the raising of Lazarus (11:1-44), a man who had been dead for four days. The story graphically brings out Jesus’ power over death and his readiness to confer the gift of life. Jesus speaks of himself as “the resurrection and the life” (v 25); death cannot defeat him. He brings life to the dead, to the spiritually dead as well as to physically dead Lazarus. John goes on to note the reaction to this miracle: some believed, but some opposed Jesus (vv 45-57). He includes a notable saying of Caiaphas, the high priest, that one man should die for the people (vv 50-52). Caiaphas was speaking as a cynical politician (better one dead, however innocent, than the whole nation be troubled). But John saw in the words the deeper meaning that Jesus’ death would bring salvation to many.<\/p>\n<p>John rounds off his account of the ministry with the story of the anointing of Jesus by a woman in Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the coming of some Greeks to Jesus, and his final summary of what he had taught (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Last Supper<\/h5>\n<p>The account of what went on in the upper room on the night before the Crucifixion is the fullest of all the four Gospels. Curiously, John says nothing about the institution of Communion, a fact that has never been satisfactorily explained. But he tells us how Jesus washed the feet of the disciples (13:1-17), an action splendidly exemplifying the spirit of lowly service so soon to be shown on the cross. Then comes the prophecy of the betrayal, an action that set in motion the events that would lead to the cross (vv 18-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the long discourse that follows, Jesus dealt with some questions posed by his followers and went on to teach them some important truths, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). He develops the thought that he is the true vine, the disciples being vitally joined to him as branches to the vine. It is important for the branches to remain in the vine if they are to have life (15:1-16). Then come some words about suffering that would be of help to them in times of persecution (vv 17-25). Jesus goes on to speak about the Holy Spirit (15:26–16:15). This is a very important passage, for it contains much more about the Spirit than we find elsewhere in Jesus’ words. Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete,” a title not easy to understand. It is in origin a legal term, and at least we can say that it indicates that the Spirit brings friendship, encouragement, and help. Jesus went on to speak of his approaching departure from the disciples and to prepare them for the trying time ahead (16:16-33). This part of the Gospel concludes with Jesus’ great High Priestly prayer. He prayed for the disciples to be one, as he commended them to the care of the heavenly Father (ch 17).<\/p>\n<h5>The Cross and Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, he went forward to meet them and they fell to the ground (18:1-11). He gave himself over to them; they did not take him over. At the outset of his passion narrative, John was making the point that Jesus is sovereign. He was not being defeated by the march of events but was sovereignly doing the will of the Father. John is the only one to tell us that Jesus was taken before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, the reigning high priest (18:12-14, 19-24). He tells also of Peter’s three denials of Jesus (vv 15-27). He did not spend much time on the Jewish trial, but he was much more explicit than the other Evangelists in his account of the Roman trial. Clearly, he had some special knowledge of what went on before Pilate. He presents a magnificent picture of Jesus talking with Pilate about kingship—the Son of God discussing with the representative of Caesar the meaning of sovereignty (vv 33-40).<\/p>\n<p>In his account of the Crucifixion John has a number of touches of his own, notably the way Jesus commended Mary to the care of the beloved disciple (19:26-27), the fact that the cry Jesus uttered as he died was “It is finished” (v 30), and the piercing of his side by a soldier’s spear (vv 31-37).<\/p>\n<p>John proceeds to the narrative of the burial (vv 38-42) and of the empty tomb (20:1-10). He speaks of appearances of the risen Lord to Mary Magdalene (vv 11-18), and to the disciples—both without (vv 19-23) and with Thomas (vv 24-29).<\/p>\n<p>The final chapter, an epilogue, tells of a miraculous catch of fish (21:1-14) and goes on to the moving account of Peter’s threefold declaration of love to Jesus and his restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOHN, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>The fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospels. (See discussion above on John, the Apostle.)<\/p>\n\n<p>The Gospel appears to have been written by one who knew the Jews and the Palestine of Jesus’ day well. He was familiar with Jewish messianic expectations (e.g., Jn 1:20-21; 4:25; 7:40-42; 12:34). He knew of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9) and the contempt the Pharisees had for “the people of the land” (7:49). He knew of the importance attached to the religious schools (v 15). He knew the way the Sabbath was observed and was aware of the provision that the obligation to circumcise on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath regulations (vv 22-23). Throughout the Gospel he moved with certainty in the vast range of Jewish ideas and customs.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same with topography. The writer mentioned many places, and his place-names all seem to be used correctly. He referred to Cana, a village not mentioned in any earlier literature known to us, which means that the reference almost certainly came from someone who actually knew the place. He located Bethany with some precision as about 15 stadia from Jerusalem (about 2 miles, or 3.2 kilometers, 11:18). He had several references to places in or near Jerusalem, such as Bethesda (5:2), Siloam (9:7), and the Kidron Valley (18:1). Of course, this does not rule out some contemporary of John’s, but it makes it difficult to think of the author as a much later individual writing at a distance from Palestine. The evidence as we have it indicates that the writer was a Jew in the Palestine of Jesus’ day.<\/p>\n<p>To many careful readers, it seems that the Gospel bears the stamp of an eyewitness. For example, Jesus was teaching “in the treasury” (8:20). Nothing is made of the point; the incident could easily have been told without it. It looks like a reminiscence of someone who sees the scene in his mind’s eye as he writes. The fact that the house was filled with fragrance when the woman broke the perfume jar (12:3) does not materially affect the account but is the kind of detail that one who was there would remember. The author noted that the loaves used in the feeding of the multitude were barley loaves (6:9) and that Jesus’ tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top to bottom (19:23). He told us that the branches with which Jesus was greeted were palm branches (12:13), and that it was night when Judas went out (13:30). Such touches are found throughout the Gospel, and it seems unjustified to treat them as no more than an attempt to create verisimilitude. They seem much more like indications that the author was writing about events in which he had himself taken part.<\/p>\n<p>The early church accepted Johannine authorship without question. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all see the apostle as the author. The first to quote this Gospel by name was Theophilus of Antioch, about <span>AD<\/span> 180.<\/p>\n<p>Those who object to Johannine authorship emphasize the differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics. The argument is that if Jesus was anything like the Christ portrayed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he could not be like the Christ of the fourth Gospel. This is a completely subjective argument, ignoring the fact that any great man will appear differently to different people. The judgment of the church throughout the centuries has been that Jesus was large enough to inspire both portraits. To put the same point another way, we have no reason for holding that the first three Evangelists tell us all there is to know about Jesus. There is no contradiction. John simply brings out other aspects of Jesus’ life and teachings.<\/p>\n<p>While we cannot prove beyond all doubt that John the apostle was the author, we can say that there is more reason for holding to this view than to any other.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>It has been usual for conservatives and liberals alike to date this writing in the last decade of the first century or early in the second. Some liberal scholars have put it well into the second century, but this is not common, and it is remarkable that there has been such a considerable measure of agreement.<\/p>\n<p>It is said that this Gospel is dependent on the Synoptics, which means that it must be dated sometime after them. But this argument has been widely abandoned in recent times. There is so much in John that is without parallel in the other three Gospels, and conversely so much in the other three that John might have used had he known it, that it is very difficult indeed to hold that this writer had any of the other Gospels before him when he wrote, or even that he had read them. Such resemblances as there are seem better explained by common use of oral tradition.<\/p>\n<p>It is also argued that there is a very developed theology in John and that we must allow time for its development. Granted, the theology of this Gospel is profound, but this does not require that we must wait for it until the end of the first century. The theology of the Letter to the Romans is also profound, and there is no reason for dating that writing later than the 50s. On the ground of development, then, there is no reason for putting John later than Romans. Development is a slippery argument at best, for it usually takes place at uneven rates, and we have no means of knowing how fast it took place in the area where the author lived.<\/p>\n<p>Other arguments for a late date are no more conclusive. For example, it is urged that the ecclesiastical system presupposed by the Gospel is too late for the time of the apostle John, and that the sacramental system of chapters 3 and 6 must have taken time to develop. But John does not mention any sacrament. It is true that many scholars think these chapters refer to baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but the fact is that John mentions neither.<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising in view of the way the traditional arguments have crumbled away that many in recent times are arguing that John must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70. If it were later, why does not John have some reference to it? Some of his language appears to be earlier. In 5:2 he says there “is” (not “was”) a pool called Bethesda. And he often refers to the Twelve as Jesus’ disciples, or “his” disciples, or the like. In later times Christians usually said “the” disciples, for they saw no need to say whose the disciples were. But in the early days, when Christians were in contact with rabbis (each of whom had his disciples), it was important to show that Jesus’ disciples were in mind. It is important also that John makes no reference to any of the synoptic Gospels. The simplest explanation is that he had not seen them. They were not yet widely circulated.<\/p>\n<p>None of this enables us to date this Gospel with precision. But the weight of evidence points to an early date (before <span>AD<\/span> 70).<\/p>\n<p>The author was John the apostle, a Jew. However, the writing gives evidence of contact with Greek thought, for example, in the reference to Christ as “the Word” in chapter 1 and the translation of words like “rabbi” (1:38). It is almost universally held that such considerations compel us to see the work as originating in a center of Greek culture, and Ephesus has traditionally been favored. Before the end of the second century we have Irenaeus writing that John published the Gospel during his residence at Ephesus.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to similarities between John and the Odes of Solomon, which they think came from Syria. As there are also some resemblances in the language of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, this is held to show that John was written in Syria, probably at Antioch. Others again think that Egypt was the place, and they support this by pointing out that the oldest fragment of a manuscript of this Gospel was found there. There is no real evidence, and we are left with probabilities. There is much to be said for accepting the evidence of Irenaeus and seeing Ephesus as the place of origin, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>There is no real indication of the intended destination. From 20:31 we learn that the book was written that the readers might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and that by believing they might have life. The Gospel, then, has an evangelistic aim. But it is also possible that “believe” means “keep on believing”—“go on in faith,” rather than “begin to believe.” That is to say, the book may have been meant from the beginning to build people up in the faith. Probably we should not distinguish between these aims too sharply. Both may well be in mind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Several possible backgrounds to the Gospel have been suggested. The Greek interest is obvious, and this writing has sometimes been called the Gospel of the Hellenists. The suggestion is that we should look to Greek writings, perhaps the works of the philosophers or Philo of Alexandria, to find the right background against which to understand what John has written. This approach may be seen in the work of Rudolf Bultmann, who thought specifically of Gnosticism. Indeed, for Bultmann one of the sources of this Gospel was a discourse source that he thought was taken from non-Christian Gnosticism. Not many have been prepared to follow Bultmann, but a number of recent commentators have discerned some form of Gnosticism as the backdrop to John.<\/p>\n<p>While such views are put forward seriously, there are some substantial objections. One is that, despite the confident assertions of some scholars, Gnosticism has never been shown to be earlier than Christianity. In the form in which it comes before us in history, it is a Christian heresy, and of course, the Christian faith must appear before a Christian heresy is possible. Another objection is that there is a basic difference between the two systems. Gnosticism is concerned with knowledge (the very word is derived from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>,<\/em> “knowledge”). Its “redeemer” is one who comes from heaven with knowledge. But John does not subscribe to the view that man is saved by knowledge. The Redeemer comes to take away the sin of the world (1:29). Gnosticism tells people that life is an upward struggle; Christianity tells of a Savior who came down to raise them up. It is not easy to see any form of Gnosticism as the essential background to Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Much more significant is John’s Semitic background. Especially important here is the OT, accepted as sacred Scripture by Jew and Christian alike. It lies constantly behind John’s statements, and it must be studied carefully if John is to be understood. It is plain that John knew and loved the Septuagint, the translation into Greek of the Hebrew OT. Again and again, the Septuagint can be shown to lie behind what John says.<\/p>\n<p>In modern times important discoveries have been made at Qumran, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. Among the scrolls unearthed in the caves of this area are several that have affinities with John. Indeed, one of the interesting facts about the scrolls is that they have more parallels with John than with any other part of the NT, a fact difficult to explain if John was written late and at a distance from Palestine. The resemblances to the Qumran writings must be viewed with care, for there is often a linguistic resemblance where the thinking is quite different. For example, both use the unusual expression “the Spirit of truth.” But where John means one of the persons of the Trinity, the scrolls speak of “a spirit of truth” and “a spirit of error” striving in the souls of people. The connection is real, but John is clearly not dependent on the scrolls for his thinking. The contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they afford additional evidence that this Gospel is basically Palestinian and must be understood against a background of first-century Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Other backgrounds have been suggested, such as the Hermetic literature. This is a group of writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus (“Hermes Thrice-greatest”), a designation of the Egyptian god Thoth. There are indeed some points of contact with John, but they are few in comparison with those of writings rooted in Palestine. It is difficult to take such suggestions seriously. John is essentially Palestinian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The writer told us that Jesus did many “signs” (or miracles) that he had not recorded, but “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life” (Jn 20:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). John wrote to show that Jesus is the Messiah. But he did not do this simply with a view to conveying interesting information. He wanted his readers to see this knowledge as a challenge to faith; when they believe, they will have life. John sought to bring men and women to Christ; he had an evangelistic aim. That does not exhaust what he was trying to do, for his words have meaning for believers. It is important that believers have a right knowledge of Jesus and that they continue to believe.<\/p>\n<p>The main theological teaching of this Gospel, then, is that God has sent his Messiah, Jesus. He is the very Son of God, and he comes to bring life (3:16). Though Jesus told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, this is not often said so specifically. The avoidance of the term might well be because of the political overtones it had acquired among the Jews at large. They looked for a Messiah who would fight the Romans. He would defeat them and set up a mighty world empire with its capital in Jerusalem. Jesus was not aiming at anything like that, and it was important that he avoid the kind of language that would give that impression. But though the conventional messianic terminology is avoided, John left no doubt that Jesus was God’s chosen one. Again and again he depicted Jesus as fulfilling messianic functions. For example, in the long discourse in chapter 6 we see Jesus as the bread from heaven, fulfilling the expectation that when Messiah came, he would renew the manna; and in the giving of sight to the blind man (ch 9) we have another messianic function (cf. Is 35:5).<\/p>\n<p>With this greatness of Jesus, John also combined teaching about his lowliness. A continuing, though unobtrusive, strand of Johannine teaching is that Jesus depends on the Father for everything. Apart from the Father, Jesus said, he could do nothing (Jn 5:30). His very food is to do the Father’s will (4:34). He lives through the Father (6:57). It is the Father who gives him his disciples (6:37, 44; 17:6). It is the Father who bears witness to him (5:32, 37). John insists that Jesus is in no sense independent of the Father. In the mission of Jesus, John sees the working out of the purpose of the Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue and Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>John begins with a prologue (1:1-18) that is unlike anything in any of the other Gospels. In it he refers to Jesus as “the Word,” a term that has points of contact with both Greek and Hebrew thinking. As John uses it, it conveys the thought that Jesus is the expression of the mind of the Father. John speaks of the Word as God (1:1), sees him as active in creation (1:3-5), goes on to the witness borne to him by John the Baptist (1:6-8), speaks of the coming of the Word into the world (1:9-14), and finishes with a section on the greatness of the Word (1:15-18). In this prologue he briefly introduces some of the great themes that will be developed throughout the Gospel. It is a majestic introduction to the whole.<\/p>\n<p>Next we have the beginnings of Jesus’ public ministry (1:19-51). Jesus’ work was preceded by that of John the Baptist, and the Evangelist tells us first about the kind of witness that the Baptist gave to Jesus. Witness is one of his important concepts, and witness is all that John the Baptist does in this Gospel. From this witness we move to the way the first disciples came to Jesus. We learn something of how Andrew and Peter came to know the Lord. We read also of Philip and Nathanael, of whom we learn little or nothing in the other Gospels.<\/p>\n<h5>The Signs and Discourses (2:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The public ministry of Jesus is described in a very distinctive way in this Gospel. John has a long section (chs 2–12) in which he tells of a number of miracles Jesus did, interweaving into his account a series of discourses. Sometimes these are addresses given to groups of people, and sometimes they are talks with individuals. Some scholars call this section of the Gospel the Book of Signs, thus emphasizing the prominent place given to seven miracles. For John they are not simply wonders. They are meaningful; in the literal sense of the term they are <em>sign<\/em>ificant.<\/p>\n<p>The first of them is the turning of the water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee (2:1-11). The water in question is connected with Jewish rites of purification (v 6), and the story is surely to teach us that Jesus transforms life. He changes the water of the law into the wine of the gospel. As a result of this “sign,” his disciples believed in him (v 11). John went on to tell how Jesus went up to Jerusalem and drove the traders out of the temple. They were selling animals for sacrifice and changing money. But their business was being done in the Court of the Gentiles, the only place in the temple where a Gentile could come to meditate and pray.<\/p>\n<p>The first discourse is on the new birth (3:1-21). Jesus talked with Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, about the necessity for radical renewal if one is to enter the kingdom. Jesus was speaking of God’s regenerating activity, not some human reformation. Following this, John records a dispute between some of John’s disciples with a Jew on the subject of purification. This opens the way for a section that shows the superiority of Jesus over John the Baptist—by the Baptist’s own confession (3:22-36).<\/p>\n<p>The second discourse is really a long conversation Jesus had with the woman of Samaria, whom he met by a well (4:1-42). It turns on “the water of life,” a term that is not fully explained in this chapter but which we later find points to the life-giving Spirit (7:38-39). This leads to the story of the second sign, the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54), notable for the fact that Jesus healed at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>The third sign is the healing of the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (5:1-18). This man had spent many years waiting for healing at the moving of the water. Jesus told him to get up and walk, and he did. Because it was done on a Sabbath, the Pharisees objected. This leads to Jesus’ third discourse, that on the divine Son (5:19-47). Here the closeness of the relationship of Jesus to the Father is stressed, and his place in the judgment is brought out. There is emphasis also on the variety of witness who encountered Jesus, which shows how reasonable it is to accept him as God’s own Son.<\/p>\n<p>John’s fourth sign is the one miracle (apart from the resurrection) found in all four Gospels: the feeding of the 5,000 (6:1-15). It is followed by Jesus’ walking on water (vv 16-21), which seems to be meant as the fifth sign (though some scholars think not; if they are right, there are only six signs). Then comes the fourth discourse, the great sermon on the bread of life (vv 22-59). Jesus is this bread, which he gives to all men and women who believe in him. There are references to eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv 50-58), which point to his death. Some have seen in them a reference to Communion, but it is hard to see why Jesus should refer in this way to an as-yet-nonexistent sacrament. Moreover, much the same effect is attributed in the same discourse to believing (vv 35, 47). It seems best to understand Jesus as meaning that people must believe in him as the one who would die for them in order for them to have life.<\/p>\n<p>There is a section detailing Peter’s affirmation of loyalty in the face of some who drifted away from the Master (6:67-71). Then we come to the fifth discourse, on the life-giving Spirit (7:1-52). John has an important explanatory point of his own when he tells us that at the time the Spirit had not been given because Jesus had not yet been glorified (v 39). The fullness of the Spirit depends on the completion of the work of Christ in his death and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The sixth discourse tells of the light of the world (8:12-59). This aspect of Jesus’ person and ministry is dramatically brought out in the sixth sign, the healing of the man born blind (ch 9). It is a lively narrative, as the healed man conducts a spirited defense against the Pharisees who belittled Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most beautiful of all the illustrations of Jesus’ relations to his people is that on which he dwells in the seventh discourse, where he speaks of himself as the good shepherd (ch 10). There is the obvious truth that sheep depend entirely on their shepherd, but Jesus says something else. Whereas earthly shepherds live to meet the needs of their sheep, Jesus laid down his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The final sign is the raising of Lazarus (11:1-44), a man who had been dead for four days. The story graphically brings out Jesus’ power over death and his readiness to confer the gift of life. Jesus speaks of himself as “the resurrection and the life” (v 25); death cannot defeat him. He brings life to the dead, to the spiritually dead as well as to physically dead Lazarus. John goes on to note the reaction to this miracle: some believed, but some opposed Jesus (vv 45-57). He includes a notable saying of Caiaphas, the high priest, that one man should die for the people (vv 50-52). Caiaphas was speaking as a cynical politician (better one dead, however innocent, than the whole nation be troubled). But John saw in the words the deeper meaning that Jesus’ death would bring salvation to many.<\/p>\n<p>John rounds off his account of the ministry with the story of the anointing of Jesus by a woman in Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the coming of some Greeks to Jesus, and his final summary of what he had taught (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Last Supper<\/h5>\n<p>The account of what went on in the upper room on the night before the Crucifixion is the fullest of all the four Gospels. Curiously, John says nothing about the institution of Communion, a fact that has never been satisfactorily explained. But he tells us how Jesus washed the feet of the disciples (13:1-17), an action splendidly exemplifying the spirit of lowly service so soon to be shown on the cross. Then comes the prophecy of the betrayal, an action that set in motion the events that would lead to the cross (vv 18-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the long discourse that follows, Jesus dealt with some questions posed by his followers and went on to teach them some important truths, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). He develops the thought that he is the true vine, the disciples being vitally joined to him as branches to the vine. It is important for the branches to remain in the vine if they are to have life (15:1-16). Then come some words about suffering that would be of help to them in times of persecution (vv 17-25). Jesus goes on to speak about the Holy Spirit (15:26–16:15). This is a very important passage, for it contains much more about the Spirit than we find elsewhere in Jesus’ words. Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete,” a title not easy to understand. It is in origin a legal term, and at least we can say that it indicates that the Spirit brings friendship, encouragement, and help. Jesus went on to speak of his approaching departure from the disciples and to prepare them for the trying time ahead (16:16-33). This part of the Gospel concludes with Jesus’ great High Priestly prayer. He prayed for the disciples to be one, as he commended them to the care of the heavenly Father (ch 17).<\/p>\n<h5>The Cross and Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, he went forward to meet them and they fell to the ground (18:1-11). He gave himself over to them; they did not take him over. At the outset of his passion narrative, John was making the point that Jesus is sovereign. He was not being defeated by the march of events but was sovereignly doing the will of the Father. John is the only one to tell us that Jesus was taken before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, the reigning high priest (18:12-14, 19-24). He tells also of Peter’s three denials of Jesus (vv 15-27). He did not spend much time on the Jewish trial, but he was much more explicit than the other Evangelists in his account of the Roman trial. Clearly, he had some special knowledge of what went on before Pilate. He presents a magnificent picture of Jesus talking with Pilate about kingship—the Son of God discussing with the representative of Caesar the meaning of sovereignty (vv 33-40).<\/p>\n<p>In his account of the Crucifixion John has a number of touches of his own, notably the way Jesus commended Mary to the care of the beloved disciple (19:26-27), the fact that the cry Jesus uttered as he died was “It is finished” (v 30), and the piercing of his side by a soldier’s spear (vv 31-37).<\/p>\n<p>John proceeds to the narrative of the burial (vv 38-42) and of the empty tomb (20:1-10). He speaks of appearances of the risen Lord to Mary Magdalene (vv 11-18), and to the disciples—both without (vv 19-23) and with Thomas (vv 24-29).<\/p>\n<p>The final chapter, an epilogue, tells of a miraculous catch of fish (21:1-14) and goes on to the moving account of Peter’s threefold declaration of love to Jesus and his restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOHN, Gospel of The fourth Gospel. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospe...","summary_en":"JOHN, Gospel of The fourth Gospel. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospe...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":23303,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Light","title_en":"Light","content_ro":"<h3>LIGHT<\/h3>\n<p>Illumination that makes sight possible.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Light is a many-sided concept in the OT. The term is often used of ordinary, sensible light, but it also speaks of communicating spiritual truth. Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gn 1:3). God also made individual lights such as the sun, moon, and stars (v 16). Sometimes light is personified, as when its inaccessibility is indicated by saying that it is impossible to reach the place where it lives (Jb 38:19; cf. v 24). There are also manufactured light sources, such as those used in the tabernacle (Ex 25:37).<\/p>\n<p>Light is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting, or what is associated with important people and more especially with God. “Light is pleasant,” says the preacher (Eccl 11:7). During one of the plagues in Egypt, the Egyptians were in thick darkness while the Israelites had light (Ex 10:23). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led in the wilderness by a pillar of cloud by day and of fire by night (13:21). The pillar gave them light when their enemies were in darkness (14:20). In later days Israel remembered that God did not abandon his people even when they sinned; the pillar of fire was always there to show them the right way (Neh 9:19; cf. Neh 9:12; Pss 78:14; 105:39).<\/p>\n<p>Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord. Job said, “He floods the darkness with light; he brings light to the deepest gloom” (Jb 12:22, <span>nlt<\/span>). In his time of trouble Job recalled earlier, better days: “I long for the years gone by when God took care of me, when he lighted the way before me and I walked safely through the darkness” (Jb 29:2-3, <span>nlt<\/span>). Similarly Eliphaz pictured the happiness that would befall Job if he would take Eliphaz’s advice: “Whatever you decide to do will be accomplished, and light will shine on the road ahead of you” (Jb 22:28, <span>nlt<\/span>). Eliphaz’s use of that expression shows what is commonly conveyed in his day. The psalmist counted it a blessing when God himself lighted his lamp (Pss 18:28; 118:27; cf. 97:11; 112:4).<\/p>\n<p>Light is closely linked with God; indeed, God can be said to be light: “No longer will you need the sun or moon to give you light, for the <span>Lord<\/span> your God will be your everlasting light, and he will be your glory. The sun will never set; the moon will not go down. For the <span>Lord<\/span> will be your everlasting light” (Is 60:19-20, <span>nlt<\/span>). The psalmist exulted, “The <span>Lord<\/span> is my light and my salvation” (Ps 27:1). God is said to be robed with light (104:2), and light dwells with him (Dn 2:22). Darkness is no problem to God; darkness and light are alike to him (Ps 139:12). Micah saw God as light and also as bringing his servants into the light (Mi 7:8-9). Both are ways of affirming that there is blessing and victory with God, so that a servant of God need never be dismayed.<\/p>\n<p>God’s blessing, described in terms of light, is also related to “the light of his presence.” Something of that expression’s meaning is seen from its use in Psalm 4:6: “Many people say, ‘Who will show us better times?’ Let the smile of your face shine on us, <span>Lord<\/span>” (<span>nlt<\/span>). The parallelism shows that “good” and the lifting up of the light of God’s countenance are much the same. Similarly, it was the light of God’s countenance that brought victory (Ps 44:3; here it is linked with God’s right hand and arm and his delight in his people). Those who walk in the light of God’s countenance are blessed (89:15). There is another side to that expression, for secret sins are exposed in his light (90:8). There is a close scrutiny from which no one and nothing can escape. But the predominant idea is that of the blessing that follows from God’s looking upon his people. On one occasion the phrase is used of a person showing favor to others (Jb 29:24). An extension of the Lord’s blessing is the light God gives to the world through his servants (Is 42:6; 49:6). God’s servants can guide others to the revelation and blessing of God.<\/p>\n<p>Light is associated with justice when the Lord says, “A law will go forth from me, and my justice for a light to the peoples” (Is 51:4, <span>rsv<\/span>). God’s light in that act of justice is a consuming fire. Sometimes light is connected with good behavior: “The path of the righteous is like the light of dawn, which shines brighter and brighter until full day” (Prv 4:18, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The OT uses the absence of light as a synonym for disaster. There are those who grope in the dark without light (Jb 12:25). Bildad saw the light of the wicked put out in punishment and death (18:5-17). The wicked will be “thrust from light into darkness” (v 18). In the aftermath of the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem there came the lament “He has brought me into deep darkness, shutting out all light” (Lam 3:2, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>New Testament references to light are often figurative. Thus, on the Damascus road, Saul of Tarsus encountered “a light from heaven” (Acts 9:3; cf. 22:6-11; 26:13). Was that light as we know it or something else? Likewise, what quality of light shone in the apostle Peter’s cell (12:7)? The light in the heavenly city is not the kind of illumination seen on earth, “for the Lord God will be their light” (Rv 22:5; cf. 21:11, 23-24).<\/p>\n<p>The association of God with light is recurrent in the NT. The apostle John wrote that “God is light and there is no darkness in him at all” (1 Jn 1:5, <span>nlt<\/span>). The apostle James referred to God as “the Father of lights” (Jas 1:17). Or God may be thought of as living in light, light that no person can approach (1 Tm 6:16; cf. 1 Jn 1:7). Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (Jn 8:12; see also 9:5), and “I have come as light into the world, that whoever believes in me may not remain in darkness” (Jn 12:46, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus told his followers to believe in the light while it was with them (v 35). Such passages emphasize that Christ brought a revelation from God, but he was more than a revealer. He was himself that revelation, according to the apostle John (Jn 1:1-10). John the Baptist came to bear witness to the light for the purpose of bringing people to believe (vv 7-8). Those who received Jesus, who believed in the light, received the right to become children of God (vv 9-12). Sometimes light is used to express the illumination that happens when people come to the knowledge of God and his salvation (Mt 4:16; Lk 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18).<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps thinking of a then-popular concept of a war between light and darkness, John wrote that the light shines in the darkness and adds that the darkness has not overcome it (Jn 1:5; cf. 1 Jn 2:8). John tells us that “the light from heaven came into the world, but they loved the darkness more than the light, for their actions were evil” (Jn 3:19, <span>nlt<\/span>). To love darkness brings condemnation, now and at the final judgment. John pointed out that evildoers keep away from the light; they do not want their evil exposed. But those who “do the truth” come to the light (vv 20-21). In John’s account of the raising of Lazarus, Jesus speaks of the possibility of walking without stumbling in the light of day, but then he goes on to the way a man stumbles in the night because he has no light (11:10). The lack of light “in” the man shows that it is a spiritual process with which Jesus is concerned and not with making physical progress by daylight. He who follows Jesus will have the light of life (8:12), which indicates what Jesus has in mind.<\/p>\n<p>Those who respond to the light may be characterized as “sons of light” (Jn 12:36). Their allegiance is to the light and their conduct has been shaped by this fact. The concept is not confined to John’s Gospel, for we also see it in Luke (Lk 16:8). We find it in Paul’s affirmation that the Thessalonian Christians are children of light and of the day, not of the night or darkness (1 Thes 5:5). John speaks of walking in the light (1 Jn 1:7) and sees the conduct of the Christian as aptly symbolized by light.<\/p>\n<p>This way of looking at the Christian’s manner of life reaches its high point in the words of Jesus to his followers: “You are the light of the world” (Mt 5:14), thus applying to them words that are also applied to himself. Of course, we are not the world’s light in the same sense as he is. When light refers to Christ, there is a reference to him as Savior and not merely as one who reveals great truths. When believers are called the light of the world, there is clearly no saving significance in the description: they do not accomplish the world’s salvation. But they do point it out. It is their function to live as redeemed people. They are to show the quality of life proper to the people of God and in this way act as light to the people of the world. They are to let their light shine before the world in such a way that people will see their good deeds and so come to praise God (not, be it noted, those who do the deeds, Mt 5:16). It is important for those in this position to make full use of the light they have. It is tragic when the light that is in them is darkness (Mt 6:23; Lk 11:35).<\/p>\n<p>This metaphor is worked out in a way not congenial to modern men and women, but the basic lesson is clear. Christians have been illuminated by the light that is Christ, who dwells within his people. If they ignore the illumination he brings and live like those in the dark, then indeed they are in deep darkness. They are worse than others because they know what light is and what it can mean to them, and have turned away from it.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Darkness.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LIGHT<\/h3>\n<p>Illumination that makes sight possible.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Light is a many-sided concept in the OT. The term is often used of ordinary, sensible light, but it also speaks of communicating spiritual truth. Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gn 1:3). God also made individual lights such as the sun, moon, and stars (v 16). Sometimes light is personified, as when its inaccessibility is indicated by saying that it is impossible to reach the place where it lives (Jb 38:19; cf. v 24). There are also manufactured light sources, such as those used in the tabernacle (Ex 25:37).<\/p>\n<p>Light is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting, or what is associated with important people and more especially with God. “Light is pleasant,” says the preacher (Eccl 11:7). During one of the plagues in Egypt, the Egyptians were in thick darkness while the Israelites had light (Ex 10:23). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led in the wilderness by a pillar of cloud by day and of fire by night (13:21). The pillar gave them light when their enemies were in darkness (14:20). In later days Israel remembered that God did not abandon his people even when they sinned; the pillar of fire was always there to show them the right way (Neh 9:19; cf. Neh 9:12; Pss 78:14; 105:39).<\/p>\n<p>Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord. Job said, “He floods the darkness with light; he brings light to the deepest gloom” (Jb 12:22, <span>nlt<\/span>). In his time of trouble Job recalled earlier, better days: “I long for the years gone by when God took care of me, when he lighted the way before me and I walked safely through the darkness” (Jb 29:2-3, <span>nlt<\/span>). Similarly Eliphaz pictured the happiness that would befall Job if he would take Eliphaz’s advice: “Whatever you decide to do will be accomplished, and light will shine on the road ahead of you” (Jb 22:28, <span>nlt<\/span>). Eliphaz’s use of that expression shows what is commonly conveyed in his day. The psalmist counted it a blessing when God himself lighted his lamp (Pss 18:28; 118:27; cf. 97:11; 112:4).<\/p>\n<p>Light is closely linked with God; indeed, God can be said to be light: “No longer will you need the sun or moon to give you light, for the <span>Lord<\/span> your God will be your everlasting light, and he will be your glory. The sun will never set; the moon will not go down. For the <span>Lord<\/span> will be your everlasting light” (Is 60:19-20, <span>nlt<\/span>). The psalmist exulted, “The <span>Lord<\/span> is my light and my salvation” (Ps 27:1). God is said to be robed with light (104:2), and light dwells with him (Dn 2:22). Darkness is no problem to God; darkness and light are alike to him (Ps 139:12). Micah saw God as light and also as bringing his servants into the light (Mi 7:8-9). Both are ways of affirming that there is blessing and victory with God, so that a servant of God need never be dismayed.<\/p>\n<p>God’s blessing, described in terms of light, is also related to “the light of his presence.” Something of that expression’s meaning is seen from its use in Psalm 4:6: “Many people say, ‘Who will show us better times?’ Let the smile of your face shine on us, <span>Lord<\/span>” (<span>nlt<\/span>). The parallelism shows that “good” and the lifting up of the light of God’s countenance are much the same. Similarly, it was the light of God’s countenance that brought victory (Ps 44:3; here it is linked with God’s right hand and arm and his delight in his people). Those who walk in the light of God’s countenance are blessed (89:15). There is another side to that expression, for secret sins are exposed in his light (90:8). There is a close scrutiny from which no one and nothing can escape. But the predominant idea is that of the blessing that follows from God’s looking upon his people. On one occasion the phrase is used of a person showing favor to others (Jb 29:24). An extension of the Lord’s blessing is the light God gives to the world through his servants (Is 42:6; 49:6). God’s servants can guide others to the revelation and blessing of God.<\/p>\n<p>Light is associated with justice when the Lord says, “A law will go forth from me, and my justice for a light to the peoples” (Is 51:4, <span>rsv<\/span>). God’s light in that act of justice is a consuming fire. Sometimes light is connected with good behavior: “The path of the righteous is like the light of dawn, which shines brighter and brighter until full day” (Prv 4:18, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The OT uses the absence of light as a synonym for disaster. There are those who grope in the dark without light (Jb 12:25). Bildad saw the light of the wicked put out in punishment and death (18:5-17). The wicked will be “thrust from light into darkness” (v 18). In the aftermath of the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem there came the lament “He has brought me into deep darkness, shutting out all light” (Lam 3:2, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>New Testament references to light are often figurative. Thus, on the Damascus road, Saul of Tarsus encountered “a light from heaven” (Acts 9:3; cf. 22:6-11; 26:13). Was that light as we know it or something else? Likewise, what quality of light shone in the apostle Peter’s cell (12:7)? The light in the heavenly city is not the kind of illumination seen on earth, “for the Lord God will be their light” (Rv 22:5; cf. 21:11, 23-24).<\/p>\n<p>The association of God with light is recurrent in the NT. The apostle John wrote that “God is light and there is no darkness in him at all” (1 Jn 1:5, <span>nlt<\/span>). The apostle James referred to God as “the Father of lights” (Jas 1:17). Or God may be thought of as living in light, light that no person can approach (1 Tm 6:16; cf. 1 Jn 1:7). Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (Jn 8:12; see also 9:5), and “I have come as light into the world, that whoever believes in me may not remain in darkness” (Jn 12:46, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus told his followers to believe in the light while it was with them (v 35). Such passages emphasize that Christ brought a revelation from God, but he was more than a revealer. He was himself that revelation, according to the apostle John (Jn 1:1-10). John the Baptist came to bear witness to the light for the purpose of bringing people to believe (vv 7-8). Those who received Jesus, who believed in the light, received the right to become children of God (vv 9-12). Sometimes light is used to express the illumination that happens when people come to the knowledge of God and his salvation (Mt 4:16; Lk 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18).<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps thinking of a then-popular concept of a war between light and darkness, John wrote that the light shines in the darkness and adds that the darkness has not overcome it (Jn 1:5; cf. 1 Jn 2:8). John tells us that “the light from heaven came into the world, but they loved the darkness more than the light, for their actions were evil” (Jn 3:19, <span>nlt<\/span>). To love darkness brings condemnation, now and at the final judgment. John pointed out that evildoers keep away from the light; they do not want their evil exposed. But those who “do the truth” come to the light (vv 20-21). In John’s account of the raising of Lazarus, Jesus speaks of the possibility of walking without stumbling in the light of day, but then he goes on to the way a man stumbles in the night because he has no light (11:10). The lack of light “in” the man shows that it is a spiritual process with which Jesus is concerned and not with making physical progress by daylight. He who follows Jesus will have the light of life (8:12), which indicates what Jesus has in mind.<\/p>\n<p>Those who respond to the light may be characterized as “sons of light” (Jn 12:36). Their allegiance is to the light and their conduct has been shaped by this fact. The concept is not confined to John’s Gospel, for we also see it in Luke (Lk 16:8). We find it in Paul’s affirmation that the Thessalonian Christians are children of light and of the day, not of the night or darkness (1 Thes 5:5). John speaks of walking in the light (1 Jn 1:7) and sees the conduct of the Christian as aptly symbolized by light.<\/p>\n<p>This way of looking at the Christian’s manner of life reaches its high point in the words of Jesus to his followers: “You are the light of the world” (Mt 5:14), thus applying to them words that are also applied to himself. Of course, we are not the world’s light in the same sense as he is. When light refers to Christ, there is a reference to him as Savior and not merely as one who reveals great truths. When believers are called the light of the world, there is clearly no saving significance in the description: they do not accomplish the world’s salvation. But they do point it out. It is their function to live as redeemed people. They are to show the quality of life proper to the people of God and in this way act as light to the people of the world. They are to let their light shine before the world in such a way that people will see their good deeds and so come to praise God (not, be it noted, those who do the deeds, Mt 5:16). It is important for those in this position to make full use of the light they have. It is tragic when the light that is in them is darkness (Mt 6:23; Lk 11:35).<\/p>\n<p>This metaphor is worked out in a way not congenial to modern men and women, but the basic lesson is clear. Christians have been illuminated by the light that is Christ, who dwells within his people. If they ignore the illumination he brings and live like those in the dark, then indeed they are in deep darkness. They are worse than others because they know what light is and what it can mean to them, and have turned away from it.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Darkness.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LIGHT Illumination that makes sight possible. In the Old Testament Light is a many-sided concept in the OT. The term is often used of ordinary, sensible light, but it also speaks of communicating spiritual truth. Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gn 1:3). God also made individual lights such as the sun, moon, and stars (v 16). Sometimes light is personified, as when its inaccessibility is indicated by saying that it is impossible to reach the place where it li...","summary_en":"LIGHT Illumination that makes sight possible. In the Old Testament Light is a many-sided concept in the OT. The term is often used of ordinary, sensible light, but it also speaks of communicating spiritual truth. Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gn 1:3). God also made individual lights such as the sun, moon, and stars (v 16). Sometimes light is personified, as when its inaccessibility is indicated by saying that it is impossible to reach the place where it li...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":63256,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Darkness and Light","title_en":"Darkness and Light","content_ro":"<h3>Darkness and Light<\/h3>\n<h5>Darkness<\/h5>\n<p>Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 <em>\/\/<\/em> 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sam 22:10 <em>\/\/<\/em> Ps 18:9). God is unknowable unless he reveals himself.<\/p>\n<p>Darkness often stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gen 15:12; Job 12:25; 19:8; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Isa 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>For Job, darkness was like nothingness (Job 3:4-6). It points to death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Job 10:21-22; 17:12-13; Eccl 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>Evil takes place under the cover of darkness (Job 24:16-17), but darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Ps 139:11-12; Isa 29:15-16). Darkness often depicts ignorance of God’s will: Knowledge of God is “light,” so lack of knowledge is “darkness” (Job 12:24-25; Matt 4:16; John 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11). Moral depravity is described as darkness (Prov 2:13; 4:19; Isa 5:20; 60:2). In the New Testament, darkness is also a metaphor for spiritual ignorance (Matt 4:16; 6:23; Luke 1:79; 11:35; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13). Those who come to know God come out of darkness (Isa 9:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of the Old Testament prophets was the Day of the Lord, which was often associated with darkness (Ezek 32:8; Joel 2:2, 31; Amos 5:18, 20; Zeph 1:15). The New Testament also links darkness with judgment (Matt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pet 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13).<\/p>\n<h5>Light<\/h5>\n<p>Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gen 1:3; see also 1:16). It is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting (Eccl 11:7; Jas 1:17). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led by a pillar of cloud and fire that gave them light (Exod 13:21; 14:20) and showed them the way to go (Neh 9:19). Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord (Job 12:22; 29:2-3; Pss 4:6; 18:28; 44:3; 118:27). God’s servants can extend this blessing by being a light to guide others (Isa 42:6; 49:6). God’s light also exposes sin and brings justice (see Ps 90:8; Isa 51:4).<\/p>\n<p>God himself is described as light (Ps 27:1; Isa 60:19-20; Dan 2:22; 1 Jn 1:5), and he dwells in unapproachable light (see 1 Tim 6:16). Yet he brings his servants into the light (Mic 7:8-9; see also 1 Jn 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). He brought a revelation (light) from God, but he was more than a revealer—he was himself that revelation (John 1:1-10). Those who receive Jesus, who believe in the Light, receive the right to become children of God (John 1:9-12). They are illumined by his light and come to know God and his salvation (Matt 4:16; Luke 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18). They are “children of the light” (John 12:36; 1 Thes 5:5), their allegiance is to the light (1 Jn 1:7), and their conduct is characterized by light—by “what is good and right and true” (Eph 5:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-5, 14-18; 15:12; Exod 10:21-23; 14:20; 20:21; 2 Sam 22:10-13; 1 Kgs 8:12; Job 3:3-7; 12:22-25; 15:22; 17:12-13; 34:22; Pss 18:11, 28; 27:1; 97:2-6; 139:11-12; Prov 2:13; 4:18-19; Eccl 11:7-8; Isa 5:20; 9:2; 29:15; 51:4; 60:2-3, 19-20; Dan 2:22; Mic 7:8-9; Matt 4:16; 6:22-23; 8:12; Luke 1:78-79; 2:32; John 1:4-9; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-36, 46; Acts 13:47; 26:18; Rom 2:19-20; Eph 5:7-14; 1 Thes 5:5-8; 1 Tim 6:16; Jas 1:17; 2 Pet 2:17; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:7-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Darkness and Light<\/h3>\n<h5>Darkness<\/h5>\n<p>Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 <em>\/\/<\/em> 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sam 22:10 <em>\/\/<\/em> Ps 18:9). God is unknowable unless he reveals himself.<\/p>\n<p>Darkness often stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gen 15:12; Job 12:25; 19:8; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Isa 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>For Job, darkness was like nothingness (Job 3:4-6). It points to death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Job 10:21-22; 17:12-13; Eccl 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>Evil takes place under the cover of darkness (Job 24:16-17), but darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Ps 139:11-12; Isa 29:15-16). Darkness often depicts ignorance of God’s will: Knowledge of God is “light,” so lack of knowledge is “darkness” (Job 12:24-25; Matt 4:16; John 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11). Moral depravity is described as darkness (Prov 2:13; 4:19; Isa 5:20; 60:2). In the New Testament, darkness is also a metaphor for spiritual ignorance (Matt 4:16; 6:23; Luke 1:79; 11:35; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13). Those who come to know God come out of darkness (Isa 9:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of the Old Testament prophets was the Day of the Lord, which was often associated with darkness (Ezek 32:8; Joel 2:2, 31; Amos 5:18, 20; Zeph 1:15). The New Testament also links darkness with judgment (Matt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pet 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13).<\/p>\n<h5>Light<\/h5>\n<p>Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gen 1:3; see also 1:16). It is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting (Eccl 11:7; Jas 1:17). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led by a pillar of cloud and fire that gave them light (Exod 13:21; 14:20) and showed them the way to go (Neh 9:19). Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord (Job 12:22; 29:2-3; Pss 4:6; 18:28; 44:3; 118:27). God’s servants can extend this blessing by being a light to guide others (Isa 42:6; 49:6). God’s light also exposes sin and brings justice (see Ps 90:8; Isa 51:4).<\/p>\n<p>God himself is described as light (Ps 27:1; Isa 60:19-20; Dan 2:22; 1 Jn 1:5), and he dwells in unapproachable light (see 1 Tim 6:16). Yet he brings his servants into the light (Mic 7:8-9; see also 1 Jn 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). He brought a revelation (light) from God, but he was more than a revealer—he was himself that revelation (John 1:1-10). Those who receive Jesus, who believe in the Light, receive the right to become children of God (John 1:9-12). They are illumined by his light and come to know God and his salvation (Matt 4:16; Luke 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18). They are “children of the light” (John 12:36; 1 Thes 5:5), their allegiance is to the light (1 Jn 1:7), and their conduct is characterized by light—by “what is good and right and true” (Eph 5:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-5, 14-18; 15:12; Exod 10:21-23; 14:20; 20:21; 2 Sam 22:10-13; 1 Kgs 8:12; Job 3:3-7; 12:22-25; 15:22; 17:12-13; 34:22; Pss 18:11, 28; 27:1; 97:2-6; 139:11-12; Prov 2:13; 4:18-19; Eccl 11:7-8; Isa 5:20; 9:2; 29:15; 51:4; 60:2-3, 19-20; Dan 2:22; Mic 7:8-9; Matt 4:16; 6:22-23; 8:12; Luke 1:78-79; 2:32; John 1:4-9; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-36, 46; Acts 13:47; 26:18; Rom 2:19-20; Eph 5:7-14; 1 Thes 5:5-8; 1 Tim 6:16; Jas 1:17; 2 Pet 2:17; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:7-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Darkness and Light Darkness Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23). There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 \/\/ 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sa...","summary_en":"Darkness and Light Darkness Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23). There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 \/\/ 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sa...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66065,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The World","title_en":"The World","content_ro":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","summary_en":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":90882,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Darkness and Light","title_en":"Darkness and Light","content_ro":"<h3>Darkness and Light<\/h3>\n<h5>Darkness<\/h5>\n<p>Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 <em>\/\/<\/em> 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sam 22:10 <em>\/\/<\/em> Ps 18:9). God is unknowable unless he reveals himself.<\/p>\n<p>Darkness often stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gen 15:12; Job 12:25; 19:8; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Isa 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>For Job, darkness was like nothingness (Job 3:4-6). It points to death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Job 10:21-22; 17:12-13; Eccl 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>Evil takes place under the cover of darkness (Job 24:16-17), but darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Ps 139:11-12; Isa 29:15-16). Darkness often depicts ignorance of God’s will: Knowledge of God is “light,” so lack of knowledge is “darkness” (Job 12:24-25; Matt 4:16; John 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11). Moral depravity is described as darkness (Prov 2:13; 4:19; Isa 5:20; 60:2). In the New Testament, darkness is also a metaphor for spiritual ignorance (Matt 4:16; 6:23; Luke 1:79; 11:35; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13). Those who come to know God come out of darkness (Isa 9:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of the Old Testament prophets was the Day of the Lord, which was often associated with darkness (Ezek 32:8; Joel 2:2, 31; Amos 5:18, 20; Zeph 1:15). The New Testament also links darkness with judgment (Matt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pet 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13).<\/p>\n<h5>Light<\/h5>\n<p>Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gen 1:3; see also 1:16). It is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting (Eccl 11:7; Jas 1:17). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led by a pillar of cloud and fire that gave them light (Exod 13:21; 14:20) and showed them the way to go (Neh 9:19). Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord (Job 12:22; 29:2-3; Pss 4:6; 18:28; 44:3; 118:27). God’s servants can extend this blessing by being a light to guide others (Isa 42:6; 49:6). God’s light also exposes sin and brings justice (see Ps 90:8; Isa 51:4).<\/p>\n<p>God himself is described as light (Ps 27:1; Isa 60:19-20; Dan 2:22; 1 Jn 1:5), and he dwells in unapproachable light (see 1 Tim 6:16). Yet he brings his servants into the light (Mic 7:8-9; see also 1 Jn 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). He brought a revelation (light) from God, but he was more than a revealer—he was himself that revelation (John 1:1-10). Those who receive Jesus, who believe in the Light, receive the right to become children of God (John 1:9-12). They are illumined by his light and come to know God and his salvation (Matt 4:16; Luke 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18). They are “children of the light” (John 12:36; 1 Thes 5:5), their allegiance is to the light (1 Jn 1:7), and their conduct is characterized by light—by “what is good and right and true” (Eph 5:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-5, 14-18; 15:12; Exod 10:21-23; 14:20; 20:21; 2 Sam 22:10-13; 1 Kgs 8:12; Job 3:3-7; 12:22-25; 15:22; 17:12-13; 34:22; Pss 18:11, 28; 27:1; 97:2-6; 139:11-12; Prov 2:13; 4:18-19; Eccl 11:7-8; Isa 5:20; 9:2; 29:15; 51:4; 60:2-3, 19-20; Dan 2:22; Mic 7:8-9; Matt 4:16; 6:22-23; 8:12; Luke 1:78-79; 2:32; John 1:4-9; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-36, 46; Acts 13:47; 26:18; Rom 2:19-20; Eph 5:7-14; 1 Thes 5:5-8; 1 Tim 6:16; Jas 1:17; 2 Pet 2:17; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:7-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Darkness and Light<\/h3>\n<h5>Darkness<\/h5>\n<p>Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 <em>\/\/<\/em> 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sam 22:10 <em>\/\/<\/em> Ps 18:9). God is unknowable unless he reveals himself.<\/p>\n<p>Darkness often stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gen 15:12; Job 12:25; 19:8; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Isa 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>For Job, darkness was like nothingness (Job 3:4-6). It points to death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Job 10:21-22; 17:12-13; Eccl 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>Evil takes place under the cover of darkness (Job 24:16-17), but darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Ps 139:11-12; Isa 29:15-16). Darkness often depicts ignorance of God’s will: Knowledge of God is “light,” so lack of knowledge is “darkness” (Job 12:24-25; Matt 4:16; John 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11). Moral depravity is described as darkness (Prov 2:13; 4:19; Isa 5:20; 60:2). In the New Testament, darkness is also a metaphor for spiritual ignorance (Matt 4:16; 6:23; Luke 1:79; 11:35; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13). Those who come to know God come out of darkness (Isa 9:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of the Old Testament prophets was the Day of the Lord, which was often associated with darkness (Ezek 32:8; Joel 2:2, 31; Amos 5:18, 20; Zeph 1:15). The New Testament also links darkness with judgment (Matt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pet 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13).<\/p>\n<h5>Light<\/h5>\n<p>Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gen 1:3; see also 1:16). It is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting (Eccl 11:7; Jas 1:17). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led by a pillar of cloud and fire that gave them light (Exod 13:21; 14:20) and showed them the way to go (Neh 9:19). Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord (Job 12:22; 29:2-3; Pss 4:6; 18:28; 44:3; 118:27). God’s servants can extend this blessing by being a light to guide others (Isa 42:6; 49:6). God’s light also exposes sin and brings justice (see Ps 90:8; Isa 51:4).<\/p>\n<p>God himself is described as light (Ps 27:1; Isa 60:19-20; Dan 2:22; 1 Jn 1:5), and he dwells in unapproachable light (see 1 Tim 6:16). Yet he brings his servants into the light (Mic 7:8-9; see also 1 Jn 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). He brought a revelation (light) from God, but he was more than a revealer—he was himself that revelation (John 1:1-10). Those who receive Jesus, who believe in the Light, receive the right to become children of God (John 1:9-12). They are illumined by his light and come to know God and his salvation (Matt 4:16; Luke 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18). They are “children of the light” (John 12:36; 1 Thes 5:5), their allegiance is to the light (1 Jn 1:7), and their conduct is characterized by light—by “what is good and right and true” (Eph 5:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-5, 14-18; 15:12; Exod 10:21-23; 14:20; 20:21; 2 Sam 22:10-13; 1 Kgs 8:12; Job 3:3-7; 12:22-25; 15:22; 17:12-13; 34:22; Pss 18:11, 28; 27:1; 97:2-6; 139:11-12; Prov 2:13; 4:18-19; Eccl 11:7-8; Isa 5:20; 9:2; 29:15; 51:4; 60:2-3, 19-20; Dan 2:22; Mic 7:8-9; Matt 4:16; 6:22-23; 8:12; Luke 1:78-79; 2:32; John 1:4-9; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-36, 46; Acts 13:47; 26:18; Rom 2:19-20; Eph 5:7-14; 1 Thes 5:5-8; 1 Tim 6:16; Jas 1:17; 2 Pet 2:17; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:7-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Darkness and Light Darkness Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23). There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 \/\/ 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sa...","summary_en":"Darkness and Light Darkness Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23). There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 \/\/ 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sa...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93691,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The World","title_en":"The World","content_ro":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","summary_en":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":118508,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Darkness and Light","title_en":"Darkness and Light","content_ro":"<h3>Darkness and Light<\/h3>\n<h5>Darkness<\/h5>\n<p>Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 <em>\/\/<\/em> 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sam 22:10 <em>\/\/<\/em> Ps 18:9). God is unknowable unless he reveals himself.<\/p>\n<p>Darkness often stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gen 15:12; Job 12:25; 19:8; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Isa 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>For Job, darkness was like nothingness (Job 3:4-6). It points to death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Job 10:21-22; 17:12-13; Eccl 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>Evil takes place under the cover of darkness (Job 24:16-17), but darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Ps 139:11-12; Isa 29:15-16). Darkness often depicts ignorance of God’s will: Knowledge of God is “light,” so lack of knowledge is “darkness” (Job 12:24-25; Matt 4:16; John 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11). Moral depravity is described as darkness (Prov 2:13; 4:19; Isa 5:20; 60:2). In the New Testament, darkness is also a metaphor for spiritual ignorance (Matt 4:16; 6:23; Luke 1:79; 11:35; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13). Those who come to know God come out of darkness (Isa 9:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of the Old Testament prophets was the Day of the Lord, which was often associated with darkness (Ezek 32:8; Joel 2:2, 31; Amos 5:18, 20; Zeph 1:15). The New Testament also links darkness with judgment (Matt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pet 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13).<\/p>\n<h5>Light<\/h5>\n<p>Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gen 1:3; see also 1:16). It is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting (Eccl 11:7; Jas 1:17). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led by a pillar of cloud and fire that gave them light (Exod 13:21; 14:20) and showed them the way to go (Neh 9:19). Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord (Job 12:22; 29:2-3; Pss 4:6; 18:28; 44:3; 118:27). God’s servants can extend this blessing by being a light to guide others (Isa 42:6; 49:6). God’s light also exposes sin and brings justice (see Ps 90:8; Isa 51:4).<\/p>\n<p>God himself is described as light (Ps 27:1; Isa 60:19-20; Dan 2:22; 1 Jn 1:5), and he dwells in unapproachable light (see 1 Tim 6:16). Yet he brings his servants into the light (Mic 7:8-9; see also 1 Jn 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). He brought a revelation (light) from God, but he was more than a revealer—he was himself that revelation (John 1:1-10). Those who receive Jesus, who believe in the Light, receive the right to become children of God (John 1:9-12). They are illumined by his light and come to know God and his salvation (Matt 4:16; Luke 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18). They are “children of the light” (John 12:36; 1 Thes 5:5), their allegiance is to the light (1 Jn 1:7), and their conduct is characterized by light—by “what is good and right and true” (Eph 5:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-5, 14-18; 15:12; Exod 10:21-23; 14:20; 20:21; 2 Sam 22:10-13; 1 Kgs 8:12; Job 3:3-7; 12:22-25; 15:22; 17:12-13; 34:22; Pss 18:11, 28; 27:1; 97:2-6; 139:11-12; Prov 2:13; 4:18-19; Eccl 11:7-8; Isa 5:20; 9:2; 29:15; 51:4; 60:2-3, 19-20; Dan 2:22; Mic 7:8-9; Matt 4:16; 6:22-23; 8:12; Luke 1:78-79; 2:32; John 1:4-9; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-36, 46; Acts 13:47; 26:18; Rom 2:19-20; Eph 5:7-14; 1 Thes 5:5-8; 1 Tim 6:16; Jas 1:17; 2 Pet 2:17; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:7-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Darkness and Light<\/h3>\n<h5>Darkness<\/h5>\n<p>Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 <em>\/\/<\/em> 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sam 22:10 <em>\/\/<\/em> Ps 18:9). God is unknowable unless he reveals himself.<\/p>\n<p>Darkness often stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gen 15:12; Job 12:25; 19:8; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Isa 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>For Job, darkness was like nothingness (Job 3:4-6). It points to death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Job 10:21-22; 17:12-13; Eccl 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>Evil takes place under the cover of darkness (Job 24:16-17), but darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Ps 139:11-12; Isa 29:15-16). Darkness often depicts ignorance of God’s will: Knowledge of God is “light,” so lack of knowledge is “darkness” (Job 12:24-25; Matt 4:16; John 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11). Moral depravity is described as darkness (Prov 2:13; 4:19; Isa 5:20; 60:2). In the New Testament, darkness is also a metaphor for spiritual ignorance (Matt 4:16; 6:23; Luke 1:79; 11:35; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13). Those who come to know God come out of darkness (Isa 9:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of the Old Testament prophets was the Day of the Lord, which was often associated with darkness (Ezek 32:8; Joel 2:2, 31; Amos 5:18, 20; Zeph 1:15). The New Testament also links darkness with judgment (Matt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pet 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13).<\/p>\n<h5>Light<\/h5>\n<p>Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gen 1:3; see also 1:16). It is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting (Eccl 11:7; Jas 1:17). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led by a pillar of cloud and fire that gave them light (Exod 13:21; 14:20) and showed them the way to go (Neh 9:19). Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord (Job 12:22; 29:2-3; Pss 4:6; 18:28; 44:3; 118:27). God’s servants can extend this blessing by being a light to guide others (Isa 42:6; 49:6). God’s light also exposes sin and brings justice (see Ps 90:8; Isa 51:4).<\/p>\n<p>God himself is described as light (Ps 27:1; Isa 60:19-20; Dan 2:22; 1 Jn 1:5), and he dwells in unapproachable light (see 1 Tim 6:16). Yet he brings his servants into the light (Mic 7:8-9; see also 1 Jn 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). He brought a revelation (light) from God, but he was more than a revealer—he was himself that revelation (John 1:1-10). Those who receive Jesus, who believe in the Light, receive the right to become children of God (John 1:9-12). They are illumined by his light and come to know God and his salvation (Matt 4:16; Luke 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18). They are “children of the light” (John 12:36; 1 Thes 5:5), their allegiance is to the light (1 Jn 1:7), and their conduct is characterized by light—by “what is good and right and true” (Eph 5:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-5, 14-18; 15:12; Exod 10:21-23; 14:20; 20:21; 2 Sam 22:10-13; 1 Kgs 8:12; Job 3:3-7; 12:22-25; 15:22; 17:12-13; 34:22; Pss 18:11, 28; 27:1; 97:2-6; 139:11-12; Prov 2:13; 4:18-19; Eccl 11:7-8; Isa 5:20; 9:2; 29:15; 51:4; 60:2-3, 19-20; Dan 2:22; Mic 7:8-9; Matt 4:16; 6:22-23; 8:12; Luke 1:78-79; 2:32; John 1:4-9; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-36, 46; Acts 13:47; 26:18; Rom 2:19-20; Eph 5:7-14; 1 Thes 5:5-8; 1 Tim 6:16; Jas 1:17; 2 Pet 2:17; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:7-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Darkness and Light Darkness Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23). There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 \/\/ 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sa...","summary_en":"Darkness and Light Darkness Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23). There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 \/\/ 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sa...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121317,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The World","title_en":"The World","content_ro":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","summary_en":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":146134,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Darkness and Light","title_en":"Darkness and Light","content_ro":"<h3>Darkness and Light<\/h3>\n<h5>Darkness<\/h5>\n<p>Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 <em>\/\/<\/em> 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sam 22:10 <em>\/\/<\/em> Ps 18:9). God is unknowable unless he reveals himself.<\/p>\n<p>Darkness often stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gen 15:12; Job 12:25; 19:8; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Isa 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>For Job, darkness was like nothingness (Job 3:4-6). It points to death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Job 10:21-22; 17:12-13; Eccl 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>Evil takes place under the cover of darkness (Job 24:16-17), but darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Ps 139:11-12; Isa 29:15-16). Darkness often depicts ignorance of God’s will: Knowledge of God is “light,” so lack of knowledge is “darkness” (Job 12:24-25; Matt 4:16; John 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11). Moral depravity is described as darkness (Prov 2:13; 4:19; Isa 5:20; 60:2). In the New Testament, darkness is also a metaphor for spiritual ignorance (Matt 4:16; 6:23; Luke 1:79; 11:35; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13). Those who come to know God come out of darkness (Isa 9:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of the Old Testament prophets was the Day of the Lord, which was often associated with darkness (Ezek 32:8; Joel 2:2, 31; Amos 5:18, 20; Zeph 1:15). The New Testament also links darkness with judgment (Matt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pet 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13).<\/p>\n<h5>Light<\/h5>\n<p>Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gen 1:3; see also 1:16). It is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting (Eccl 11:7; Jas 1:17). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led by a pillar of cloud and fire that gave them light (Exod 13:21; 14:20) and showed them the way to go (Neh 9:19). Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord (Job 12:22; 29:2-3; Pss 4:6; 18:28; 44:3; 118:27). God’s servants can extend this blessing by being a light to guide others (Isa 42:6; 49:6). God’s light also exposes sin and brings justice (see Ps 90:8; Isa 51:4).<\/p>\n<p>God himself is described as light (Ps 27:1; Isa 60:19-20; Dan 2:22; 1 Jn 1:5), and he dwells in unapproachable light (see 1 Tim 6:16). Yet he brings his servants into the light (Mic 7:8-9; see also 1 Jn 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). He brought a revelation (light) from God, but he was more than a revealer—he was himself that revelation (John 1:1-10). Those who receive Jesus, who believe in the Light, receive the right to become children of God (John 1:9-12). They are illumined by his light and come to know God and his salvation (Matt 4:16; Luke 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18). They are “children of the light” (John 12:36; 1 Thes 5:5), their allegiance is to the light (1 Jn 1:7), and their conduct is characterized by light—by “what is good and right and true” (Eph 5:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-5, 14-18; 15:12; Exod 10:21-23; 14:20; 20:21; 2 Sam 22:10-13; 1 Kgs 8:12; Job 3:3-7; 12:22-25; 15:22; 17:12-13; 34:22; Pss 18:11, 28; 27:1; 97:2-6; 139:11-12; Prov 2:13; 4:18-19; Eccl 11:7-8; Isa 5:20; 9:2; 29:15; 51:4; 60:2-3, 19-20; Dan 2:22; Mic 7:8-9; Matt 4:16; 6:22-23; 8:12; Luke 1:78-79; 2:32; John 1:4-9; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-36, 46; Acts 13:47; 26:18; Rom 2:19-20; Eph 5:7-14; 1 Thes 5:5-8; 1 Tim 6:16; Jas 1:17; 2 Pet 2:17; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:7-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Darkness and Light<\/h3>\n<h5>Darkness<\/h5>\n<p>Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 <em>\/\/<\/em> 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sam 22:10 <em>\/\/<\/em> Ps 18:9). God is unknowable unless he reveals himself.<\/p>\n<p>Darkness often stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gen 15:12; Job 12:25; 19:8; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Isa 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>For Job, darkness was like nothingness (Job 3:4-6). It points to death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Job 10:21-22; 17:12-13; Eccl 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>Evil takes place under the cover of darkness (Job 24:16-17), but darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Ps 139:11-12; Isa 29:15-16). Darkness often depicts ignorance of God’s will: Knowledge of God is “light,” so lack of knowledge is “darkness” (Job 12:24-25; Matt 4:16; John 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11). Moral depravity is described as darkness (Prov 2:13; 4:19; Isa 5:20; 60:2). In the New Testament, darkness is also a metaphor for spiritual ignorance (Matt 4:16; 6:23; Luke 1:79; 11:35; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13). Those who come to know God come out of darkness (Isa 9:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of the Old Testament prophets was the Day of the Lord, which was often associated with darkness (Ezek 32:8; Joel 2:2, 31; Amos 5:18, 20; Zeph 1:15). The New Testament also links darkness with judgment (Matt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pet 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13).<\/p>\n<h5>Light<\/h5>\n<p>Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gen 1:3; see also 1:16). It is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting (Eccl 11:7; Jas 1:17). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led by a pillar of cloud and fire that gave them light (Exod 13:21; 14:20) and showed them the way to go (Neh 9:19). Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord (Job 12:22; 29:2-3; Pss 4:6; 18:28; 44:3; 118:27). God’s servants can extend this blessing by being a light to guide others (Isa 42:6; 49:6). God’s light also exposes sin and brings justice (see Ps 90:8; Isa 51:4).<\/p>\n<p>God himself is described as light (Ps 27:1; Isa 60:19-20; Dan 2:22; 1 Jn 1:5), and he dwells in unapproachable light (see 1 Tim 6:16). Yet he brings his servants into the light (Mic 7:8-9; see also 1 Jn 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). He brought a revelation (light) from God, but he was more than a revealer—he was himself that revelation (John 1:1-10). Those who receive Jesus, who believe in the Light, receive the right to become children of God (John 1:9-12). They are illumined by his light and come to know God and his salvation (Matt 4:16; Luke 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18). They are “children of the light” (John 12:36; 1 Thes 5:5), their allegiance is to the light (1 Jn 1:7), and their conduct is characterized by light—by “what is good and right and true” (Eph 5:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-5, 14-18; 15:12; Exod 10:21-23; 14:20; 20:21; 2 Sam 22:10-13; 1 Kgs 8:12; Job 3:3-7; 12:22-25; 15:22; 17:12-13; 34:22; Pss 18:11, 28; 27:1; 97:2-6; 139:11-12; Prov 2:13; 4:18-19; Eccl 11:7-8; Isa 5:20; 9:2; 29:15; 51:4; 60:2-3, 19-20; Dan 2:22; Mic 7:8-9; Matt 4:16; 6:22-23; 8:12; Luke 1:78-79; 2:32; John 1:4-9; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-36, 46; Acts 13:47; 26:18; Rom 2:19-20; Eph 5:7-14; 1 Thes 5:5-8; 1 Tim 6:16; Jas 1:17; 2 Pet 2:17; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:7-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Darkness and Light Darkness Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23). There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 \/\/ 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sa...","summary_en":"Darkness and Light Darkness Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23). There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 \/\/ 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sa...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148943,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The World","title_en":"The World","content_ro":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","summary_en":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"10":[{"id":19408,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jesus Christ","title_en":"Jesus Christ","content_ro":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","summary_en":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56313,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:10","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:10","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:10<\/strong> <em>The world<\/em> cannot <em>recognize<\/em> the true light even when it encounters its Creator. The world lives in rebellion, loving darkness more than light (3:19).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:10<\/strong> <em>The world<\/em> cannot <em>recognize<\/em> the true light even when it encounters its Creator. The world lives in rebellion, loving darkness more than light (3:19).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:10 The world cannot recognize the true light even when it encounters its Creator. The world lives in rebellion, loving darkness more than light (3:19).","summary_en":"1:10 The world cannot recognize the true light even when it encounters its Creator. The world lives in rebellion, loving darkness more than light (3:19).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83939,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:10","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:10","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:10<\/strong> <em>The world<\/em> cannot <em>recognize<\/em> the true light even when it encounters its Creator. The world lives in rebellion, loving darkness more than light (3:19).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:10<\/strong> <em>The world<\/em> cannot <em>recognize<\/em> the true light even when it encounters its Creator. The world lives in rebellion, loving darkness more than light (3:19).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:10 The world cannot recognize the true light even when it encounters its Creator. The world lives in rebellion, loving darkness more than light (3:19).","summary_en":"1:10 The world cannot recognize the true light even when it encounters its Creator. The world lives in rebellion, loving darkness more than light (3:19).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111565,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:10","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:10","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:10<\/strong> <em>The world<\/em> cannot <em>recognize<\/em> the true light even when it encounters its Creator. The world lives in rebellion, loving darkness more than light (3:19).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:10<\/strong> <em>The world<\/em> cannot <em>recognize<\/em> the true light even when it encounters its Creator. The world lives in rebellion, loving darkness more than light (3:19).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:10 The world cannot recognize the true light even when it encounters its Creator. The world lives in rebellion, loving darkness more than light (3:19).","summary_en":"1:10 The world cannot recognize the true light even when it encounters its Creator. The world lives in rebellion, loving darkness more than light (3:19).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139191,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:10","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:10","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:10<\/strong> <em>The world<\/em> cannot <em>recognize<\/em> the true light even when it encounters its Creator. The world lives in rebellion, loving darkness more than light (3:19).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:10<\/strong> <em>The world<\/em> cannot <em>recognize<\/em> the true light even when it encounters its Creator. The world lives in rebellion, loving darkness more than light (3:19).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:10 The world cannot recognize the true light even when it encounters its Creator. The world lives in rebellion, loving darkness more than light (3:19).","summary_en":"1:10 The world cannot recognize the true light even when it encounters its Creator. The world lives in rebellion, loving darkness more than light (3:19).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65912,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>The world still lives in darkness and cannot understand the realities of life or of God (1:5, 10). Divine revelation is inaccessible to the world. In fact, when the light of God penetrates the darkness, exposing the ugliness of the world, many people flee deeper into the darkness because they prefer it to the light (3:19-20). Only the transforming power of God’s Spirit can provide understanding and help people see clearly as children of God (3:21; 8:12; 12:35-36, 46).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 6:8-13; 56:10-11; Matt 13:11-17; John 1:10-11; 3:19-20; John 7:32-36; 9:40-41; 12:40; Rom 1:21; 2 Cor 3:13-18; 4:3-4; 1 Jn 2:9-11; Rev 3:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>The world still lives in darkness and cannot understand the realities of life or of God (1:5, 10). Divine revelation is inaccessible to the world. In fact, when the light of God penetrates the darkness, exposing the ugliness of the world, many people flee deeper into the darkness because they prefer it to the light (3:19-20). Only the transforming power of God’s Spirit can provide understanding and help people see clearly as children of God (3:21; 8:12; 12:35-36, 46).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 6:8-13; 56:10-11; Matt 13:11-17; John 1:10-11; 3:19-20; John 7:32-36; 9:40-41; 12:40; Rom 1:21; 2 Cor 3:13-18; 4:3-4; 1 Jn 2:9-11; Rev 3:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13). The world still lives in darkness and canno...","summary_en":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13). The world still lives in darkness and canno...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66040,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The World","title_en":"The World","content_ro":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","summary_en":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":67400,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature","title_en":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature","content_ro":"<h3>The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature<\/h3>\n<p>Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he shares the nature of God himself. This claim was a major point of contention between Jesus and the religous leaders, who accused Jesus of blasphemy (John 5:16-18; 8:54-59; 10:30-39).<\/p>\n<p>The hymn also affirms that Jesus Christ came to earth in an act of immense humility—the infinite God became human (Phil 2:7; see Col 1:15; John 1:10-14; Heb 2:14, 17). Jesus Christ, the glorious Creator of the universe, died as a sacrificial offering for the sins of human beings so that we might be forgiven and be reconciled to God (Phil 2:8; see John 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Col 1:20, 22; 2:13-14; Heb 1:3; 10:9-14), as the Scriptures had foretold (see Isa 53:3-12).<\/p>\n<p>This hymn also affirms that God raised Jesus from the dead, has given him “the place of highest honor” in heaven (Phil 2:9), and conferred on him the title “Lord” (2:11; cp. Col 1:18). One day, all created beings will bow before him and acknowledge that he is Lord of the entire universe (Phil 2:9-11), deserving of the worship that God alone is worthy to receive (see Rev 5:8-14).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 53:3-12; John 1:1-2, 10-14; 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Phil 2:6-11; Col 1:15-22; 2:9, 13-14; Heb 1:1-3; 2:14, 17; 10:9-14; Rev 5:8-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature<\/h3>\n<p>Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he shares the nature of God himself. This claim was a major point of contention between Jesus and the religous leaders, who accused Jesus of blasphemy (John 5:16-18; 8:54-59; 10:30-39).<\/p>\n<p>The hymn also affirms that Jesus Christ came to earth in an act of immense humility—the infinite God became human (Phil 2:7; see Col 1:15; John 1:10-14; Heb 2:14, 17). Jesus Christ, the glorious Creator of the universe, died as a sacrificial offering for the sins of human beings so that we might be forgiven and be reconciled to God (Phil 2:8; see John 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Col 1:20, 22; 2:13-14; Heb 1:3; 10:9-14), as the Scriptures had foretold (see Isa 53:3-12).<\/p>\n<p>This hymn also affirms that God raised Jesus from the dead, has given him “the place of highest honor” in heaven (Phil 2:9), and conferred on him the title “Lord” (2:11; cp. Col 1:18). One day, all created beings will bow before him and acknowledge that he is Lord of the entire universe (Phil 2:9-11), deserving of the worship that God alone is worthy to receive (see Rev 5:8-14).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 53:3-12; John 1:1-2, 10-14; 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Phil 2:6-11; Col 1:15-22; 2:9, 13-14; Heb 1:1-3; 2:14, 17; 10:9-14; Rev 5:8-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he s...","summary_en":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he s...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93538,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>The world still lives in darkness and cannot understand the realities of life or of God (1:5, 10). Divine revelation is inaccessible to the world. In fact, when the light of God penetrates the darkness, exposing the ugliness of the world, many people flee deeper into the darkness because they prefer it to the light (3:19-20). Only the transforming power of God’s Spirit can provide understanding and help people see clearly as children of God (3:21; 8:12; 12:35-36, 46).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 6:8-13; 56:10-11; Matt 13:11-17; John 1:10-11; 3:19-20; John 7:32-36; 9:40-41; 12:40; Rom 1:21; 2 Cor 3:13-18; 4:3-4; 1 Jn 2:9-11; Rev 3:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>The world still lives in darkness and cannot understand the realities of life or of God (1:5, 10). Divine revelation is inaccessible to the world. In fact, when the light of God penetrates the darkness, exposing the ugliness of the world, many people flee deeper into the darkness because they prefer it to the light (3:19-20). Only the transforming power of God’s Spirit can provide understanding and help people see clearly as children of God (3:21; 8:12; 12:35-36, 46).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 6:8-13; 56:10-11; Matt 13:11-17; John 1:10-11; 3:19-20; John 7:32-36; 9:40-41; 12:40; Rom 1:21; 2 Cor 3:13-18; 4:3-4; 1 Jn 2:9-11; Rev 3:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13). The world still lives in darkness and canno...","summary_en":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13). The world still lives in darkness and canno...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93666,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The World","title_en":"The World","content_ro":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","summary_en":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":95026,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature","title_en":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature","content_ro":"<h3>The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature<\/h3>\n<p>Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he shares the nature of God himself. This claim was a major point of contention between Jesus and the religous leaders, who accused Jesus of blasphemy (John 5:16-18; 8:54-59; 10:30-39).<\/p>\n<p>The hymn also affirms that Jesus Christ came to earth in an act of immense humility—the infinite God became human (Phil 2:7; see Col 1:15; John 1:10-14; Heb 2:14, 17). Jesus Christ, the glorious Creator of the universe, died as a sacrificial offering for the sins of human beings so that we might be forgiven and be reconciled to God (Phil 2:8; see John 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Col 1:20, 22; 2:13-14; Heb 1:3; 10:9-14), as the Scriptures had foretold (see Isa 53:3-12).<\/p>\n<p>This hymn also affirms that God raised Jesus from the dead, has given him “the place of highest honor” in heaven (Phil 2:9), and conferred on him the title “Lord” (2:11; cp. Col 1:18). One day, all created beings will bow before him and acknowledge that he is Lord of the entire universe (Phil 2:9-11), deserving of the worship that God alone is worthy to receive (see Rev 5:8-14).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 53:3-12; John 1:1-2, 10-14; 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Phil 2:6-11; Col 1:15-22; 2:9, 13-14; Heb 1:1-3; 2:14, 17; 10:9-14; Rev 5:8-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature<\/h3>\n<p>Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he shares the nature of God himself. This claim was a major point of contention between Jesus and the religous leaders, who accused Jesus of blasphemy (John 5:16-18; 8:54-59; 10:30-39).<\/p>\n<p>The hymn also affirms that Jesus Christ came to earth in an act of immense humility—the infinite God became human (Phil 2:7; see Col 1:15; John 1:10-14; Heb 2:14, 17). Jesus Christ, the glorious Creator of the universe, died as a sacrificial offering for the sins of human beings so that we might be forgiven and be reconciled to God (Phil 2:8; see John 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Col 1:20, 22; 2:13-14; Heb 1:3; 10:9-14), as the Scriptures had foretold (see Isa 53:3-12).<\/p>\n<p>This hymn also affirms that God raised Jesus from the dead, has given him “the place of highest honor” in heaven (Phil 2:9), and conferred on him the title “Lord” (2:11; cp. Col 1:18). One day, all created beings will bow before him and acknowledge that he is Lord of the entire universe (Phil 2:9-11), deserving of the worship that God alone is worthy to receive (see Rev 5:8-14).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 53:3-12; John 1:1-2, 10-14; 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Phil 2:6-11; Col 1:15-22; 2:9, 13-14; Heb 1:1-3; 2:14, 17; 10:9-14; Rev 5:8-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he s...","summary_en":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he s...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121164,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>The world still lives in darkness and cannot understand the realities of life or of God (1:5, 10). Divine revelation is inaccessible to the world. In fact, when the light of God penetrates the darkness, exposing the ugliness of the world, many people flee deeper into the darkness because they prefer it to the light (3:19-20). Only the transforming power of God’s Spirit can provide understanding and help people see clearly as children of God (3:21; 8:12; 12:35-36, 46).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 6:8-13; 56:10-11; Matt 13:11-17; John 1:10-11; 3:19-20; John 7:32-36; 9:40-41; 12:40; Rom 1:21; 2 Cor 3:13-18; 4:3-4; 1 Jn 2:9-11; Rev 3:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>The world still lives in darkness and cannot understand the realities of life or of God (1:5, 10). Divine revelation is inaccessible to the world. In fact, when the light of God penetrates the darkness, exposing the ugliness of the world, many people flee deeper into the darkness because they prefer it to the light (3:19-20). Only the transforming power of God’s Spirit can provide understanding and help people see clearly as children of God (3:21; 8:12; 12:35-36, 46).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 6:8-13; 56:10-11; Matt 13:11-17; John 1:10-11; 3:19-20; John 7:32-36; 9:40-41; 12:40; Rom 1:21; 2 Cor 3:13-18; 4:3-4; 1 Jn 2:9-11; Rev 3:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13). The world still lives in darkness and canno...","summary_en":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13). The world still lives in darkness and canno...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121292,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The World","title_en":"The World","content_ro":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","summary_en":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":122652,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature","title_en":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature","content_ro":"<h3>The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature<\/h3>\n<p>Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he shares the nature of God himself. This claim was a major point of contention between Jesus and the religous leaders, who accused Jesus of blasphemy (John 5:16-18; 8:54-59; 10:30-39).<\/p>\n<p>The hymn also affirms that Jesus Christ came to earth in an act of immense humility—the infinite God became human (Phil 2:7; see Col 1:15; John 1:10-14; Heb 2:14, 17). Jesus Christ, the glorious Creator of the universe, died as a sacrificial offering for the sins of human beings so that we might be forgiven and be reconciled to God (Phil 2:8; see John 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Col 1:20, 22; 2:13-14; Heb 1:3; 10:9-14), as the Scriptures had foretold (see Isa 53:3-12).<\/p>\n<p>This hymn also affirms that God raised Jesus from the dead, has given him “the place of highest honor” in heaven (Phil 2:9), and conferred on him the title “Lord” (2:11; cp. Col 1:18). One day, all created beings will bow before him and acknowledge that he is Lord of the entire universe (Phil 2:9-11), deserving of the worship that God alone is worthy to receive (see Rev 5:8-14).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 53:3-12; John 1:1-2, 10-14; 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Phil 2:6-11; Col 1:15-22; 2:9, 13-14; Heb 1:1-3; 2:14, 17; 10:9-14; Rev 5:8-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature<\/h3>\n<p>Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he shares the nature of God himself. This claim was a major point of contention between Jesus and the religous leaders, who accused Jesus of blasphemy (John 5:16-18; 8:54-59; 10:30-39).<\/p>\n<p>The hymn also affirms that Jesus Christ came to earth in an act of immense humility—the infinite God became human (Phil 2:7; see Col 1:15; John 1:10-14; Heb 2:14, 17). Jesus Christ, the glorious Creator of the universe, died as a sacrificial offering for the sins of human beings so that we might be forgiven and be reconciled to God (Phil 2:8; see John 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Col 1:20, 22; 2:13-14; Heb 1:3; 10:9-14), as the Scriptures had foretold (see Isa 53:3-12).<\/p>\n<p>This hymn also affirms that God raised Jesus from the dead, has given him “the place of highest honor” in heaven (Phil 2:9), and conferred on him the title “Lord” (2:11; cp. Col 1:18). One day, all created beings will bow before him and acknowledge that he is Lord of the entire universe (Phil 2:9-11), deserving of the worship that God alone is worthy to receive (see Rev 5:8-14).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 53:3-12; John 1:1-2, 10-14; 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Phil 2:6-11; Col 1:15-22; 2:9, 13-14; Heb 1:1-3; 2:14, 17; 10:9-14; Rev 5:8-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he s...","summary_en":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he s...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148790,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>The world still lives in darkness and cannot understand the realities of life or of God (1:5, 10). Divine revelation is inaccessible to the world. In fact, when the light of God penetrates the darkness, exposing the ugliness of the world, many people flee deeper into the darkness because they prefer it to the light (3:19-20). Only the transforming power of God’s Spirit can provide understanding and help people see clearly as children of God (3:21; 8:12; 12:35-36, 46).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 6:8-13; 56:10-11; Matt 13:11-17; John 1:10-11; 3:19-20; John 7:32-36; 9:40-41; 12:40; Rom 1:21; 2 Cor 3:13-18; 4:3-4; 1 Jn 2:9-11; Rev 3:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>The world still lives in darkness and cannot understand the realities of life or of God (1:5, 10). Divine revelation is inaccessible to the world. In fact, when the light of God penetrates the darkness, exposing the ugliness of the world, many people flee deeper into the darkness because they prefer it to the light (3:19-20). Only the transforming power of God’s Spirit can provide understanding and help people see clearly as children of God (3:21; 8:12; 12:35-36, 46).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 6:8-13; 56:10-11; Matt 13:11-17; John 1:10-11; 3:19-20; John 7:32-36; 9:40-41; 12:40; Rom 1:21; 2 Cor 3:13-18; 4:3-4; 1 Jn 2:9-11; Rev 3:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13). The world still lives in darkness and canno...","summary_en":"Misunderstanding in the Gospel of John Throughout John’s Gospel, people encountering Jesus misunderstood him (see John 3:4; 4:11, 33; 7:35; 11:12-13). They were divided over the question of Jesus’ identity. When they perceived what he was really saying, some wanted to arrest him while others wanted to become his followers (7:40-44). Only later, when Jesus’ disciples had received the Spirit, did they really understand his significance (see 16:12-13). The world still lives in darkness and canno...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148918,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The World","title_en":"The World","content_ro":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","summary_en":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":150278,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature","title_en":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature","content_ro":"<h3>The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature<\/h3>\n<p>Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he shares the nature of God himself. This claim was a major point of contention between Jesus and the religous leaders, who accused Jesus of blasphemy (John 5:16-18; 8:54-59; 10:30-39).<\/p>\n<p>The hymn also affirms that Jesus Christ came to earth in an act of immense humility—the infinite God became human (Phil 2:7; see Col 1:15; John 1:10-14; Heb 2:14, 17). Jesus Christ, the glorious Creator of the universe, died as a sacrificial offering for the sins of human beings so that we might be forgiven and be reconciled to God (Phil 2:8; see John 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Col 1:20, 22; 2:13-14; Heb 1:3; 10:9-14), as the Scriptures had foretold (see Isa 53:3-12).<\/p>\n<p>This hymn also affirms that God raised Jesus from the dead, has given him “the place of highest honor” in heaven (Phil 2:9), and conferred on him the title “Lord” (2:11; cp. Col 1:18). One day, all created beings will bow before him and acknowledge that he is Lord of the entire universe (Phil 2:9-11), deserving of the worship that God alone is worthy to receive (see Rev 5:8-14).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 53:3-12; John 1:1-2, 10-14; 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Phil 2:6-11; Col 1:15-22; 2:9, 13-14; Heb 1:1-3; 2:14, 17; 10:9-14; Rev 5:8-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature<\/h3>\n<p>Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he shares the nature of God himself. This claim was a major point of contention between Jesus and the religous leaders, who accused Jesus of blasphemy (John 5:16-18; 8:54-59; 10:30-39).<\/p>\n<p>The hymn also affirms that Jesus Christ came to earth in an act of immense humility—the infinite God became human (Phil 2:7; see Col 1:15; John 1:10-14; Heb 2:14, 17). Jesus Christ, the glorious Creator of the universe, died as a sacrificial offering for the sins of human beings so that we might be forgiven and be reconciled to God (Phil 2:8; see John 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Col 1:20, 22; 2:13-14; Heb 1:3; 10:9-14), as the Scriptures had foretold (see Isa 53:3-12).<\/p>\n<p>This hymn also affirms that God raised Jesus from the dead, has given him “the place of highest honor” in heaven (Phil 2:9), and conferred on him the title “Lord” (2:11; cp. Col 1:18). One day, all created beings will bow before him and acknowledge that he is Lord of the entire universe (Phil 2:9-11), deserving of the worship that God alone is worthy to receive (see Rev 5:8-14).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 53:3-12; John 1:1-2, 10-14; 3:14-17; Rom 5:9-10; Phil 2:6-11; Col 1:15-22; 2:9, 13-14; Heb 1:1-3; 2:14, 17; 10:9-14; Rev 5:8-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he s...","summary_en":"The Christ Hymn: Christ’s Divine Nature Philippians 2:6-11, often called the Christ Hymn, reveals early Christian beliefs about the nature of Jesus Christ. This hymn affirms that the early Christians believed in the preexistence and divine nature of Christ (see also Col 1:15-20; 2:9; cp. John 1:1-2; Heb 1:1-3). Christ is not simply another human prophet. He was present with God the Father from the very beginning, and he is the one through whom the universe was created. As the Son of God, he s...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"12":[{"id":11836,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Faith","title_en":"Faith","content_ro":"<h3>FAITH<\/h3>\n<p>Belief in that which has no tangible proof; trust in God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DefinitionofFaith\">Definition of Faith<\/p>\n<p>In the OT and NT, “faith” carries several meanings. It may mean simple trust in God or in the Word of God, and at other times faith almost becomes equivalent to active obedience. It may also find expression in the affirmation of a creedal statement. Thus, it also comes to mean the entire body of received Christian teaching or truth—“the truth.” In Colossians 2:7, the term suggests something to be accepted as a whole and embodied in personal life. In 2 Timothy 4:7, Paul witnesses to having “kept the faith.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FaithintheOldTestament\">Faith in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT also strongly emphasizes faith as confidence in God’s covenant or in the covenant God made with Abraham and his descendants. The call of Abraham and the promise that his descendants would be used in the history of redemption became the basis of the narratives of the OT, being seen as the working out of that covenant. Once the nation Israel was brought into being, God sustained and protected it. The exodus from Egypt is a prominent indication that God was at work restoring his people to the Promised Land. The obedience of the people of God as the proper expression of faith is seen clearly in the OT. Without seeing God, his people believed and obeyed him. Abraham left his native land to go into unknown territory. The people of Israel left Egypt following the leadership of God to a land they could not see. The promise of God gave them courage to possess the land promised to them. After the exodus, the covenant of Abraham was confirmed with the people of Israel by the sprinkling of blood (Ex 24:6-7). There was to be strict obedience to God’s commands as an expression of faith. This response of human faith to the Lord’s faithfulness was national and collective. There also were commands to, and instances of, personal faith.<\/p>\n<p>Not only the narrative and legal portions of the OT but also the poetic and prophetic writings emphasize faith. The Psalms abound in expressions of personal confidence in the Lord even in dark times. Habakkuk points out that “the righteous shall live by his faith” (Hb 2:4). From such instances it is clear that, as the Lord’s education of Israel proceeded, the matter of faith in God’s faithfulness became more and more a matter of individual and personal response, and it is in the Prophets that several ingredients—such as trust, obedience, fear, and certainty—blend into the understanding of such personal faith.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FaithintheNewTestament\">Faith in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>As over against the OT, where the accent is on the faithfulness of God, in the NT the emphasis is placed on the active, responding faith of the hearer to the promised, final revelation in the Messiah, Jesus. Both verb and noun regularly describe the adequate response of people to Jesus’ word and to the gospel.<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>The most striking feature of the synoptic Gospels (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>) is the use of faith without identifying its object: “If you have faith as a grain of mustard seed” (Mt 17:20); “When Jesus saw their faith” (Mk 2:5); “Your faith has saved you” (Lk 7:50). Jesus is portrayed as one who by his work and word opens the door to faith and makes faith possible. The question is not whether the faith is in Jesus or in the Father; the implication is undoubtedly both, but as with every true bearer of the Word of God, the eye of faith is turned to the One who sends.<\/p>\n<p>On more than one occasion, Jesus denies the request for a miracle to substantiate his words (Mt 12:38-39; 16:1-4). Faith is response to the Word alone without any supporting props. No sign is to be given but the sign of Jonah. In the story of the rich man and Lazarus (Lk 16:19-31), Jesus denies the request for the spectacular and insists that the hearer must respond to the word given to him (cf. Jn 20:29). The Word demands self-surrender and commitment. Hence, the very nature of the Word and of faith becomes an obstacle to the proud and the powerful.<\/p>\n<p>Faith is the medium by which the power of God is made visible. It moves mountains, heals the sick, and is the means of entrance into the kingdom. It may be mingled with doubt, as with the father who sought healing for his son (“I believe; help my unbelief!” [Mk 9:24]), or as with John the Baptist in prison, who, even with his doubts, was confirmed by Jesus as the greatest of the offspring of woman (Mt 11:2-15). Peter’s (and the other disciples’) perception was faulty, but Jesus affirms Peter’s confession as the foundation stone of the church. The synoptic Gospels portray the early faith of the disciples in all its limitations and weaknesses, yet it is still faith in that it is their positive response to Jesus’ word and work.<\/p>\n<h5>The Fourth Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>Faith is an especially significant concept in the Gospel of John (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>), though the word (in the Greek) occurs only as a verb. Quite often the reference has to do with the acceptance that something is true, that is, simple credence, or belief: “Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father in me” (Jn 14:11); “If you believed Moses, you would believe me” (Jn 5:46).<\/p>\n<p>Even more significant is the special expression “to believe into” in the sense of putting one’s trust into another. The particular form of the expression is without parallel before the fourth Gospel and may well express the strong sense of personal trust in the eternal Word made flesh. In John 3:16, whoever puts trust in him has eternal life. Those who put their trust in him are given power to become sons of God—to be born of God (Jn 1:12). They will never thirst (6:35); they will live, even though they die (11:25).<\/p>\n<p>In other places, John speaks of trust or faith in an absolute sense, that is, without referring to the one in whom trust is placed. In John 11:15 Jesus arrives after the death of Lazarus and is glad “in order that you might believe.” The outcome is going to be faith. Similarly, in the prologue (1:7), John the Baptist bears witness in order that through him all might believe. As Jesus satisfies the doubt of Thomas concerning the resurrection, he says, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe” (20:29). In these and other passages the fundamental outcome of Jesus’ witness to himself is trust.<\/p>\n<p>Faith and knowledge are closely related. In John 6:69 Peter says, “We have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God.” In his priestly prayer Jesus says that eternal life is to “know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent” (Jn 17:3). Also, God is seen through the eyes of faith. No one has ever seen God, but the Only Begotten has revealed him (1:18). He who has seen Jesus has seen the Father (14:9).<\/p>\n<p>To believe is also expressed in the verb “receive.” Those who receive Christ are given power to become the sons of God (Jn 1:12). Trust is that form of knowing or seeing by which the glory of God (1:14; 17:4) is made present.<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>In Paul’s letters (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>), he writes about faith from a number of angles. He sets faith over against “works of the law” as the only and true basis for righteousness (Rom 1–4; Gal 1–4) and appeals to Abraham to prove his point: “Abraham believed God and it was reckoned to him for righteousness” (Gn 15:6; cf. Rom 4:5; Gal 3:6). This is entirely apart from the law (Rom 3:21); righteousness is the gift of God through faith in Christ, specifically in his atoning work. Behind Paul’s conviction lies his awareness of the radical and pervasive sinfulness of humans that renders each one helpless. Humanity is dead in sin but is made alive by faith in the word and work of Jesus mediated through the gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Faith, then, is faith in Jesus Christ. The number of metaphors Paul employs to describe the consequences of faith is staggering. It is by faith that believers are justified (Rom 5:1), reconciled (2 Cor 5:18), redeemed (Eph 1:7), made alive (2:5), adopted into the family of God (Rom 8:15-16), re-created (2 Cor 5:17), transported into a new kingdom (Col 1:13), and set free (Gal 5:1). Faith is, for Paul, the <em>sine qua non<\/em> of every aspect of salvation, from the grace that convicts to the receiving of the full inheritance at the coming of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s letters, faith is bound up with love so that the great exponent of justification by faith becomes also the articulate exponent of distinctive Christian love. To say that faith is indispensable to salvation is only part of the truth, for faith expresses itself through love: “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is of any avail, but faith working through love” (Gal 5:6); “If I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing” (1 Cor 13:2). Love is both the genesis and the ultimate expression of faith. Hence, even for Paul there can be no <em>total<\/em> separation between faith and works. This love of which Paul speaks is the essential fruit of the Spirit through whom the life of faith is lived. Only by virtue of the indwelling Spirit does faith find expression in love.<\/p>\n<h5>General Epistles<\/h5>\n<p>James speaks of faith as being completed by works (Jas 2:22). He opposed that concept of faith that thinks primarily of creedal assent, of believing that something is true without acting upon it. James, like Paul, assumes the primacy of faith, but he is warning against those who would draw wrong conclusions. Faith apart from works is not faith; it is barren (v 20). The practical dimension of faith is the burden of much of this epistle.<\/p>\n<p>The writer of Hebrews recognizes that faith has always been characteristic of the people of God and their specially called leaders. Faith makes substantial what is otherwise nebulous and uncertain; it makes evidential what is not visible. By faith the people of God have a more certain ground for their lives and their actions than the world is able to discern (Heb 11:1). The great cloud of witnesses (12:1) bear testimony by their faith to the faithfulness of God.<\/p>\n<p>Faith is opened up by the Word of God, finds expression through the Holy Spirit who is given, and bears witness to the lordship of Jesus Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FAITH<\/h3>\n<p>Belief in that which has no tangible proof; trust in God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DefinitionofFaith\">Definition of Faith<\/p>\n<p>In the OT and NT, “faith” carries several meanings. It may mean simple trust in God or in the Word of God, and at other times faith almost becomes equivalent to active obedience. It may also find expression in the affirmation of a creedal statement. Thus, it also comes to mean the entire body of received Christian teaching or truth—“the truth.” In Colossians 2:7, the term suggests something to be accepted as a whole and embodied in personal life. In 2 Timothy 4:7, Paul witnesses to having “kept the faith.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FaithintheOldTestament\">Faith in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT also strongly emphasizes faith as confidence in God’s covenant or in the covenant God made with Abraham and his descendants. The call of Abraham and the promise that his descendants would be used in the history of redemption became the basis of the narratives of the OT, being seen as the working out of that covenant. Once the nation Israel was brought into being, God sustained and protected it. The exodus from Egypt is a prominent indication that God was at work restoring his people to the Promised Land. The obedience of the people of God as the proper expression of faith is seen clearly in the OT. Without seeing God, his people believed and obeyed him. Abraham left his native land to go into unknown territory. The people of Israel left Egypt following the leadership of God to a land they could not see. The promise of God gave them courage to possess the land promised to them. After the exodus, the covenant of Abraham was confirmed with the people of Israel by the sprinkling of blood (Ex 24:6-7). There was to be strict obedience to God’s commands as an expression of faith. This response of human faith to the Lord’s faithfulness was national and collective. There also were commands to, and instances of, personal faith.<\/p>\n<p>Not only the narrative and legal portions of the OT but also the poetic and prophetic writings emphasize faith. The Psalms abound in expressions of personal confidence in the Lord even in dark times. Habakkuk points out that “the righteous shall live by his faith” (Hb 2:4). From such instances it is clear that, as the Lord’s education of Israel proceeded, the matter of faith in God’s faithfulness became more and more a matter of individual and personal response, and it is in the Prophets that several ingredients—such as trust, obedience, fear, and certainty—blend into the understanding of such personal faith.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FaithintheNewTestament\">Faith in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>As over against the OT, where the accent is on the faithfulness of God, in the NT the emphasis is placed on the active, responding faith of the hearer to the promised, final revelation in the Messiah, Jesus. Both verb and noun regularly describe the adequate response of people to Jesus’ word and to the gospel.<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>The most striking feature of the synoptic Gospels (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>) is the use of faith without identifying its object: “If you have faith as a grain of mustard seed” (Mt 17:20); “When Jesus saw their faith” (Mk 2:5); “Your faith has saved you” (Lk 7:50). Jesus is portrayed as one who by his work and word opens the door to faith and makes faith possible. The question is not whether the faith is in Jesus or in the Father; the implication is undoubtedly both, but as with every true bearer of the Word of God, the eye of faith is turned to the One who sends.<\/p>\n<p>On more than one occasion, Jesus denies the request for a miracle to substantiate his words (Mt 12:38-39; 16:1-4). Faith is response to the Word alone without any supporting props. No sign is to be given but the sign of Jonah. In the story of the rich man and Lazarus (Lk 16:19-31), Jesus denies the request for the spectacular and insists that the hearer must respond to the word given to him (cf. Jn 20:29). The Word demands self-surrender and commitment. Hence, the very nature of the Word and of faith becomes an obstacle to the proud and the powerful.<\/p>\n<p>Faith is the medium by which the power of God is made visible. It moves mountains, heals the sick, and is the means of entrance into the kingdom. It may be mingled with doubt, as with the father who sought healing for his son (“I believe; help my unbelief!” [Mk 9:24]), or as with John the Baptist in prison, who, even with his doubts, was confirmed by Jesus as the greatest of the offspring of woman (Mt 11:2-15). Peter’s (and the other disciples’) perception was faulty, but Jesus affirms Peter’s confession as the foundation stone of the church. The synoptic Gospels portray the early faith of the disciples in all its limitations and weaknesses, yet it is still faith in that it is their positive response to Jesus’ word and work.<\/p>\n<h5>The Fourth Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>Faith is an especially significant concept in the Gospel of John (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>), though the word (in the Greek) occurs only as a verb. Quite often the reference has to do with the acceptance that something is true, that is, simple credence, or belief: “Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father in me” (Jn 14:11); “If you believed Moses, you would believe me” (Jn 5:46).<\/p>\n<p>Even more significant is the special expression “to believe into” in the sense of putting one’s trust into another. The particular form of the expression is without parallel before the fourth Gospel and may well express the strong sense of personal trust in the eternal Word made flesh. In John 3:16, whoever puts trust in him has eternal life. Those who put their trust in him are given power to become sons of God—to be born of God (Jn 1:12). They will never thirst (6:35); they will live, even though they die (11:25).<\/p>\n<p>In other places, John speaks of trust or faith in an absolute sense, that is, without referring to the one in whom trust is placed. In John 11:15 Jesus arrives after the death of Lazarus and is glad “in order that you might believe.” The outcome is going to be faith. Similarly, in the prologue (1:7), John the Baptist bears witness in order that through him all might believe. As Jesus satisfies the doubt of Thomas concerning the resurrection, he says, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe” (20:29). In these and other passages the fundamental outcome of Jesus’ witness to himself is trust.<\/p>\n<p>Faith and knowledge are closely related. In John 6:69 Peter says, “We have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God.” In his priestly prayer Jesus says that eternal life is to “know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent” (Jn 17:3). Also, God is seen through the eyes of faith. No one has ever seen God, but the Only Begotten has revealed him (1:18). He who has seen Jesus has seen the Father (14:9).<\/p>\n<p>To believe is also expressed in the verb “receive.” Those who receive Christ are given power to become the sons of God (Jn 1:12). Trust is that form of knowing or seeing by which the glory of God (1:14; 17:4) is made present.<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>In Paul’s letters (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>), he writes about faith from a number of angles. He sets faith over against “works of the law” as the only and true basis for righteousness (Rom 1–4; Gal 1–4) and appeals to Abraham to prove his point: “Abraham believed God and it was reckoned to him for righteousness” (Gn 15:6; cf. Rom 4:5; Gal 3:6). This is entirely apart from the law (Rom 3:21); righteousness is the gift of God through faith in Christ, specifically in his atoning work. Behind Paul’s conviction lies his awareness of the radical and pervasive sinfulness of humans that renders each one helpless. Humanity is dead in sin but is made alive by faith in the word and work of Jesus mediated through the gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Faith, then, is faith in Jesus Christ. The number of metaphors Paul employs to describe the consequences of faith is staggering. It is by faith that believers are justified (Rom 5:1), reconciled (2 Cor 5:18), redeemed (Eph 1:7), made alive (2:5), adopted into the family of God (Rom 8:15-16), re-created (2 Cor 5:17), transported into a new kingdom (Col 1:13), and set free (Gal 5:1). Faith is, for Paul, the <em>sine qua non<\/em> of every aspect of salvation, from the grace that convicts to the receiving of the full inheritance at the coming of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s letters, faith is bound up with love so that the great exponent of justification by faith becomes also the articulate exponent of distinctive Christian love. To say that faith is indispensable to salvation is only part of the truth, for faith expresses itself through love: “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is of any avail, but faith working through love” (Gal 5:6); “If I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing” (1 Cor 13:2). Love is both the genesis and the ultimate expression of faith. Hence, even for Paul there can be no <em>total<\/em> separation between faith and works. This love of which Paul speaks is the essential fruit of the Spirit through whom the life of faith is lived. Only by virtue of the indwelling Spirit does faith find expression in love.<\/p>\n<h5>General Epistles<\/h5>\n<p>James speaks of faith as being completed by works (Jas 2:22). He opposed that concept of faith that thinks primarily of creedal assent, of believing that something is true without acting upon it. James, like Paul, assumes the primacy of faith, but he is warning against those who would draw wrong conclusions. Faith apart from works is not faith; it is barren (v 20). The practical dimension of faith is the burden of much of this epistle.<\/p>\n<p>The writer of Hebrews recognizes that faith has always been characteristic of the people of God and their specially called leaders. Faith makes substantial what is otherwise nebulous and uncertain; it makes evidential what is not visible. By faith the people of God have a more certain ground for their lives and their actions than the world is able to discern (Heb 11:1). The great cloud of witnesses (12:1) bear testimony by their faith to the faithfulness of God.<\/p>\n<p>Faith is opened up by the Word of God, finds expression through the Holy Spirit who is given, and bears witness to the lordship of Jesus Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FAITH Belief in that which has no tangible proof; trust in God. Definition of Faith In the OT and NT, “faith” carries several meanings. It may mean simple trust in God or in the Word of God, and at other times faith almost becomes equivalent to active obedience. It may also find expression in the affirmation of a creedal statement. Thus, it also comes to mean the entire body of received Christian teaching or truth—“the truth.” In Colossians 2:7, the term suggests something to be accepted as a...","summary_en":"FAITH Belief in that which has no tangible proof; trust in God. Definition of Faith In the OT and NT, “faith” carries several meanings. It may mean simple trust in God or in the Word of God, and at other times faith almost becomes equivalent to active obedience. It may also find expression in the affirmation of a creedal statement. Thus, it also comes to mean the entire body of received Christian teaching or truth—“the truth.” In Colossians 2:7, the term suggests something to be accepted as a...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":23225,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Life","title_en":"Life","content_ro":"<h3>LIFE<\/h3>\n<p>In biblical perspective, life flows from the living Father through the Son (his agent in creation and redemption) into a world thirsting for “real” life (see Jn 6:57).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheLivingFather\">The Living Father<\/p>\n<p>God the Father is above all else “the living God” (Jer 10:10; Jn 5:26). God, the source of all life (1 Tm 6:13), “inbreathed” humans at creation and sustains them continually (Jb 34:14-15). God alone gives life (Gn 17:16) and takes it away (Gn 3:22-24; 6:3; Ps 104:29; Lk 12:20).<\/p>\n<p>The sign of life is movement; man is a “lively,” animated body (Mt 27:50; Lk 8:55). Animals also have this animating “breath-soul” (Hebrew of Gn 1:24; 6:17). Thus, all nature is instilled with life deriving from God (Acts 17:24-28). Life is therefore sacred, but unfortunately it is as transient as grass, clouds, dew, shadow (1 Chr 29:15; Jb 7:6, 9; Jas 4:13-16; 1 Pt 1:24). Long life is desired (Gn 35:29); any life is preferable to death and of infinite value (Eccl 9:4-6; Mt 6:25; 16:26), for Sheol houses a ghostly “nonliving life,” bereft of feeling, hope, or divine help (Ps 88:3-12). One’s life can be enhanced by loving and serving God (Dt 30:15-20; 1 Pt 3:8-12), by experiencing God’s deliverance (Is 38:16), and by receiving divine blessings (Mt 5:3-12).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChristasLife\">Christ as Life<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word for “life” is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">zoe<\/span><em>.<\/em> In classical Greek this word was used for life in general. There are a few examples of this meaning in the New Testament (see Acts 17:25; Jas 4:14: Rv 16:3), but in all other instances the word was used to designate the divine, eternal life—the life of God (Eph 4:18). This life resided in Christ, and he made it available to all who believe in him. Human beings are born with the natural life—called <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">psuche<\/span> in Greek (translated “soul,” “personality,” or “life”); they do not possess the eternal life. This life can be received only by believing in the one who possesses the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">zoe<\/span><em>-life,<\/em> namely, Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The overflowing, vibrant quality of life made available in Christ was evident in the authority of his speech and the power of his touch (Mt 9:18; Mk 1:27, 41-42; 5:27-29). He is “the author of life” (Acts 3:15), who provides the way into life (Mt 7:14; 25:46; Mk 8:35-37; 9:42-47). And he raised the dead with his life-giving power. His own resurrection made him “a life-giving spirit,” with the power of “an indestructible life” (Rom 8:2; 1 Cor 15:45; Heb 7:16). Thus, Jesus Christ is “our life” (Col 3:4)—in union with whom we find “newness of life” (Rom 6:4) and are newly created, living henceforth not for ourselves but for him (2 Cor 5:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>John, especially, dwells on the theme that Christ is the source of this new life (Jn 3:14-16; 5:21) for the children of God (1:12; 3:3, 5). This life is enjoyed already by those who know God and Christ (5:24; 17:3; 1 Jn 5:11-12), for they have already passed from death into eternal life (Jn 10:28; 11:26). Such life is abundant (10:10), enlightened (8:12), free and satisfied (10:9), victorious (Rom 6:6-14), full of peace and joy (Rom 5:1-11), inexhaustibly refreshed (Jn 4:13-14; 7:37-38) and immortal (Jn 5:24; 1 Cor 15:51-57).<\/p>\n<p>All this is possible because from the beginning “all that came to be was alive with his life” (Jn 1:4, <span>neb<\/span>). Thus, the life within the Father flows into the world through the Son, who also “has life in himself” and gives it to whom he will (5:26). He is “the resurrection and the life” (11:25; 14:6) and demonstrates it by restoring life to paralyzed limbs, raising the dead, and conquering death (5:5-9; 11:43; ch 20). People remain in death only because they will not “come” and “have life” (5:40; cf. 1 Jn 3:14).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Eternal Life.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LIFE<\/h3>\n<p>In biblical perspective, life flows from the living Father through the Son (his agent in creation and redemption) into a world thirsting for “real” life (see Jn 6:57).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheLivingFather\">The Living Father<\/p>\n<p>God the Father is above all else “the living God” (Jer 10:10; Jn 5:26). God, the source of all life (1 Tm 6:13), “inbreathed” humans at creation and sustains them continually (Jb 34:14-15). God alone gives life (Gn 17:16) and takes it away (Gn 3:22-24; 6:3; Ps 104:29; Lk 12:20).<\/p>\n<p>The sign of life is movement; man is a “lively,” animated body (Mt 27:50; Lk 8:55). Animals also have this animating “breath-soul” (Hebrew of Gn 1:24; 6:17). Thus, all nature is instilled with life deriving from God (Acts 17:24-28). Life is therefore sacred, but unfortunately it is as transient as grass, clouds, dew, shadow (1 Chr 29:15; Jb 7:6, 9; Jas 4:13-16; 1 Pt 1:24). Long life is desired (Gn 35:29); any life is preferable to death and of infinite value (Eccl 9:4-6; Mt 6:25; 16:26), for Sheol houses a ghostly “nonliving life,” bereft of feeling, hope, or divine help (Ps 88:3-12). One’s life can be enhanced by loving and serving God (Dt 30:15-20; 1 Pt 3:8-12), by experiencing God’s deliverance (Is 38:16), and by receiving divine blessings (Mt 5:3-12).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChristasLife\">Christ as Life<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word for “life” is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">zoe<\/span><em>.<\/em> In classical Greek this word was used for life in general. There are a few examples of this meaning in the New Testament (see Acts 17:25; Jas 4:14: Rv 16:3), but in all other instances the word was used to designate the divine, eternal life—the life of God (Eph 4:18). This life resided in Christ, and he made it available to all who believe in him. Human beings are born with the natural life—called <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">psuche<\/span> in Greek (translated “soul,” “personality,” or “life”); they do not possess the eternal life. This life can be received only by believing in the one who possesses the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">zoe<\/span><em>-life,<\/em> namely, Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The overflowing, vibrant quality of life made available in Christ was evident in the authority of his speech and the power of his touch (Mt 9:18; Mk 1:27, 41-42; 5:27-29). He is “the author of life” (Acts 3:15), who provides the way into life (Mt 7:14; 25:46; Mk 8:35-37; 9:42-47). And he raised the dead with his life-giving power. His own resurrection made him “a life-giving spirit,” with the power of “an indestructible life” (Rom 8:2; 1 Cor 15:45; Heb 7:16). Thus, Jesus Christ is “our life” (Col 3:4)—in union with whom we find “newness of life” (Rom 6:4) and are newly created, living henceforth not for ourselves but for him (2 Cor 5:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>John, especially, dwells on the theme that Christ is the source of this new life (Jn 3:14-16; 5:21) for the children of God (1:12; 3:3, 5). This life is enjoyed already by those who know God and Christ (5:24; 17:3; 1 Jn 5:11-12), for they have already passed from death into eternal life (Jn 10:28; 11:26). Such life is abundant (10:10), enlightened (8:12), free and satisfied (10:9), victorious (Rom 6:6-14), full of peace and joy (Rom 5:1-11), inexhaustibly refreshed (Jn 4:13-14; 7:37-38) and immortal (Jn 5:24; 1 Cor 15:51-57).<\/p>\n<p>All this is possible because from the beginning “all that came to be was alive with his life” (Jn 1:4, <span>neb<\/span>). Thus, the life within the Father flows into the world through the Son, who also “has life in himself” and gives it to whom he will (5:26). He is “the resurrection and the life” (11:25; 14:6) and demonstrates it by restoring life to paralyzed limbs, raising the dead, and conquering death (5:5-9; 11:43; ch 20). People remain in death only because they will not “come” and “have life” (5:40; cf. 1 Jn 3:14).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Eternal Life.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LIFE In biblical perspective, life flows from the living Father through the Son (his agent in creation and redemption) into a world thirsting for “real” life (see Jn 6:57). The Living Father God the Father is above all else “the living God” (Jer 10:10; Jn 5:26). God, the source of all life (1 Tm 6:13), “inbreathed” humans at creation and sustains them continually (Jb 34:14-15). God alone gives life (Gn 17:16) and takes it away (Gn 3:22-24; 6:3; Ps 104:29; Lk 12:20). The sign of life is moveme...","summary_en":"LIFE In biblical perspective, life flows from the living Father through the Son (his agent in creation and redemption) into a world thirsting for “real” life (see Jn 6:57). The Living Father God the Father is above all else “the living God” (Jer 10:10; Jn 5:26). God, the source of all life (1 Tm 6:13), “inbreathed” humans at creation and sustains them continually (Jb 34:14-15). God alone gives life (Gn 17:16) and takes it away (Gn 3:22-24; 6:3; Ps 104:29; Lk 12:20). The sign of life is moveme...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":31048,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Power","title_en":"Power","content_ro":"<h3>POWER<\/h3>\n<p>Ability to do things, by virtue of strength, skill, resources, or authorization. In the Hebrew of the OT and the Greek of the NT, there are several different words used for power. What the Bible says about power may be subsumed under four headings: (1) the unlimited power of God; (2) the limited power God gives to his creatures; (3) the power of God seen in Jesus Christ; and (4) the power of God (by the Holy Spirit) in the lives of his people.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheUnlimitedPowerofGod\">The Unlimited Power of God<\/p>\n<p>God is almighty and all other power is derived from him and subject to him. Much that the Bible says is summed up in the words of 1 Chronicles 29:11-12 addressed to God in praise: “Thine, O <span>Lord<\/span>, is the greatness, and the power, and the glory, and the victory, and the majesty; for all that is in the heavens and in the earth is thine; thine is the kingdom, O <span>Lord<\/span>. . . . thou rulest over all. In thy hand are power and might; and in thy hand it is to make great and to give strength to all” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Using human terms, the OT often speaks of God’s “mighty hand” and his “outstretched arm,” both being used for the power of God in action (Ex 6:6; 7:4; Ps 44:2-3). His power is seen in creation (Ps 65:6; Is 40:26; Jer 10:12; 27:5), in his rule over the world (2 Chr 20:6), in his acts of salvation and judgment (Ex 15:6; Dt 26:8), and in all that he does for his people (Ps 111:6). The NT, as well as the OT, speaks of the mighty power of God. Ephesians 1:19 speaks of the immeasurable greatness of his power, and the words of Jesus in Matthew 26:64 show that the word could be substituted for the very name of God when he said that the Son of Man would be seen “seated at the right hand of Power.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheLimitedPowerGodGivestoHisCreatures\">The Limited Power God Gives to His Creatures<\/p>\n<p>Animals have power, as is particularly evident in the wild ox, the horse, and the lion (Jb 39:11, 19; Prv 30:30). There is power in wind and storm, thunder and lightning. Power is given to humans: physical strength (Jgs 16:5-6), power to fight (6:12), and the power to do good and the power to do harm (Gn 31:29; Prv 3:27; Mi 2:1). Rulers have God-given power and authority (Rom 13:1). The Bible also speaks of the power of angels (2 Pt 2:11) and of spiritual beings known as “principalities and powers.” Certain powers are given to Satan (see Jb 1:6-12; 2:1-6). Sin, evil, and death are allowed to have some power over men (Hos 13:14; Lk 22:53; Rom 3:9). All of these, however, have only limited power, and God is able to give his people strength to conquer all these powers. He can save them from the power of animals (Dn 6:27; Lk 10:19) and from the power of other people over them. To Pilate Jesus said, “You would have no power over me at all unless it were given to you from above” (Jn 19:11, <span>nlt<\/span>). He is able to deliver people from the power of sin and death, from Satan, and from all the spiritual forces of evil (2 Cor 10:4; Eph 6:10-18). The “ruler of this world” could ultimately have no power over Christ (Jn 14:30) and so cannot have power over those who rely on him.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePowerofGodSeeninJesusChrist\">The Power of God Seen in Jesus Christ<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels and the book of Acts bear frequent witness to the power of Christ. Power was shown in his miracles (Mt 11:20; Acts 2:22), in his works of healing and exorcism (Lk 4:36; 5:17; 6:19; Acts 10:38). Power is shown supremely in his resurrection. Jesus speaks of his power to give up his life and power to take it again (Jn 10:18), but the NT speaks most frequently of the power of God the Father shown in the raising of his Son from the dead (Rom 1:4; Eph 1:19-20). In the end he will be seen coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory (Mt 24:30). With regard to his human life on earth, however, it may be noted in the light of what follows that he lived and did his mighty works in the power of the Holy Spirit (Lk 4:14; Acts 10:38).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePowerofGodintheLivesofHisPeople\">The Power of God in the Lives of His People<\/p>\n<p>In the OT it is often said that the weak are made strong by the power of God. He empowers those who are weak (Is 40:29) so that they may increase from strength to strength (Ps 84:7; see also Pss 68:35; 138:3). We read in particular of his power being given to prophets (Mi 3:8) and kings (1 Sm 2:10; Ps 21:1), and it is said that in an outstanding way power will be given to the Messiah (Is 9:6; 11:2; Mi 5:4). But to all God’s people power is offered that they may live for him and serve him (Is 49:5). When we turn to the NT, we read of the gospel itself as being the power of God for salvation—to everyone who has faith (Rom 1:16). “To all who received him [Jesus Christ], who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God” (Jn 1:12, <span>rsv<\/span>). In that life as children of God, power is received from the Holy Spirit (Acts 6:8), inner strength to live in his service (Eph 3:16), power to be his witnesses (Lk 24:49; Acts 1:8), power to endure suffering (2 Tm 1:8), power for ministry (Eph 3:7), power in the face of weakness (2 Cor 12:9), power through prayer (Jas 5:16), and power to be kept from evil (1 Pt 1:5). Those who do great things in the service of Christ do not do them in their own strength (Acts 3:12); he sent out his disciples confident only in the assurance that all things are under his authority and that they would have the power of his unfailing presence with them (Mt 28:18-20).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Being and Attributes of; Principalities and Powers.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>POWER<\/h3>\n<p>Ability to do things, by virtue of strength, skill, resources, or authorization. In the Hebrew of the OT and the Greek of the NT, there are several different words used for power. What the Bible says about power may be subsumed under four headings: (1) the unlimited power of God; (2) the limited power God gives to his creatures; (3) the power of God seen in Jesus Christ; and (4) the power of God (by the Holy Spirit) in the lives of his people.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheUnlimitedPowerofGod\">The Unlimited Power of God<\/p>\n<p>God is almighty and all other power is derived from him and subject to him. Much that the Bible says is summed up in the words of 1 Chronicles 29:11-12 addressed to God in praise: “Thine, O <span>Lord<\/span>, is the greatness, and the power, and the glory, and the victory, and the majesty; for all that is in the heavens and in the earth is thine; thine is the kingdom, O <span>Lord<\/span>. . . . thou rulest over all. In thy hand are power and might; and in thy hand it is to make great and to give strength to all” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Using human terms, the OT often speaks of God’s “mighty hand” and his “outstretched arm,” both being used for the power of God in action (Ex 6:6; 7:4; Ps 44:2-3). His power is seen in creation (Ps 65:6; Is 40:26; Jer 10:12; 27:5), in his rule over the world (2 Chr 20:6), in his acts of salvation and judgment (Ex 15:6; Dt 26:8), and in all that he does for his people (Ps 111:6). The NT, as well as the OT, speaks of the mighty power of God. Ephesians 1:19 speaks of the immeasurable greatness of his power, and the words of Jesus in Matthew 26:64 show that the word could be substituted for the very name of God when he said that the Son of Man would be seen “seated at the right hand of Power.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheLimitedPowerGodGivestoHisCreatures\">The Limited Power God Gives to His Creatures<\/p>\n<p>Animals have power, as is particularly evident in the wild ox, the horse, and the lion (Jb 39:11, 19; Prv 30:30). There is power in wind and storm, thunder and lightning. Power is given to humans: physical strength (Jgs 16:5-6), power to fight (6:12), and the power to do good and the power to do harm (Gn 31:29; Prv 3:27; Mi 2:1). Rulers have God-given power and authority (Rom 13:1). The Bible also speaks of the power of angels (2 Pt 2:11) and of spiritual beings known as “principalities and powers.” Certain powers are given to Satan (see Jb 1:6-12; 2:1-6). Sin, evil, and death are allowed to have some power over men (Hos 13:14; Lk 22:53; Rom 3:9). All of these, however, have only limited power, and God is able to give his people strength to conquer all these powers. He can save them from the power of animals (Dn 6:27; Lk 10:19) and from the power of other people over them. To Pilate Jesus said, “You would have no power over me at all unless it were given to you from above” (Jn 19:11, <span>nlt<\/span>). He is able to deliver people from the power of sin and death, from Satan, and from all the spiritual forces of evil (2 Cor 10:4; Eph 6:10-18). The “ruler of this world” could ultimately have no power over Christ (Jn 14:30) and so cannot have power over those who rely on him.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePowerofGodSeeninJesusChrist\">The Power of God Seen in Jesus Christ<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels and the book of Acts bear frequent witness to the power of Christ. Power was shown in his miracles (Mt 11:20; Acts 2:22), in his works of healing and exorcism (Lk 4:36; 5:17; 6:19; Acts 10:38). Power is shown supremely in his resurrection. Jesus speaks of his power to give up his life and power to take it again (Jn 10:18), but the NT speaks most frequently of the power of God the Father shown in the raising of his Son from the dead (Rom 1:4; Eph 1:19-20). In the end he will be seen coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory (Mt 24:30). With regard to his human life on earth, however, it may be noted in the light of what follows that he lived and did his mighty works in the power of the Holy Spirit (Lk 4:14; Acts 10:38).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePowerofGodintheLivesofHisPeople\">The Power of God in the Lives of His People<\/p>\n<p>In the OT it is often said that the weak are made strong by the power of God. He empowers those who are weak (Is 40:29) so that they may increase from strength to strength (Ps 84:7; see also Pss 68:35; 138:3). We read in particular of his power being given to prophets (Mi 3:8) and kings (1 Sm 2:10; Ps 21:1), and it is said that in an outstanding way power will be given to the Messiah (Is 9:6; 11:2; Mi 5:4). But to all God’s people power is offered that they may live for him and serve him (Is 49:5). When we turn to the NT, we read of the gospel itself as being the power of God for salvation—to everyone who has faith (Rom 1:16). “To all who received him [Jesus Christ], who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God” (Jn 1:12, <span>rsv<\/span>). In that life as children of God, power is received from the Holy Spirit (Acts 6:8), inner strength to live in his service (Eph 3:16), power to be his witnesses (Lk 24:49; Acts 1:8), power to endure suffering (2 Tm 1:8), power for ministry (Eph 3:7), power in the face of weakness (2 Cor 12:9), power through prayer (Jas 5:16), and power to be kept from evil (1 Pt 1:5). Those who do great things in the service of Christ do not do them in their own strength (Acts 3:12); he sent out his disciples confident only in the assurance that all things are under his authority and that they would have the power of his unfailing presence with them (Mt 28:18-20).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Being and Attributes of; Principalities and Powers.<\/p>","summary_ro":"POWER Ability to do things, by virtue of strength, skill, resources, or authorization. In the Hebrew of the OT and the Greek of the NT, there are several different words used for power. What the Bible says about power may be subsumed under four headings: (1) the unlimited power of God; (2) the limited power God gives to his creatures; (3) the power of God seen in Jesus Christ; and (4) the power of God (by the Holy Spirit) in the lives of his people. The Unlimited Power of God God is almighty ...","summary_en":"POWER Ability to do things, by virtue of strength, skill, resources, or authorization. In the Hebrew of the OT and the Greek of the NT, there are several different words used for power. What the Bible says about power may be subsumed under four headings: (1) the unlimited power of God; (2) the limited power God gives to his creatures; (3) the power of God seen in Jesus Christ; and (4) the power of God (by the Holy Spirit) in the lives of his people. The Unlimited Power of God God is almighty ...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":32598,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Regeneration*","title_en":"Regeneration*","content_ro":"<h3>REGENERATION*<\/h3>\n<p>Spiritual rebirth producing a new beginning. It describes the new life of the believer in Christ (Ti 3:5) and the new order that will begin at Christ’s return (Mt 19:28). It occurs in the <span>kjv<\/span> of the Bible in only these two places. This does not mean, however, that the concept is unimportant. A variety of other words and figures are used frequently by the biblical writers to describe the same inner renewal of the heart.<\/p>\n<p>Secular writers also speak of regeneration. For the Stoic philosophers, it meant a return to a former state of existence. They referred to the yearly cycle of the seasons as a regeneration. For the biblical writers, however, regeneration means a renewal on a higher level. It is a radically new beginning rather than a mere restoration of previous conditions. This renewal involves a mighty change in the person. It is a work of the Holy Spirit, breaking the dominion of sin and implanting proper attitudes and desires. The regenerated person freely and joyously does the will of God. The ultimate goal of regeneration is the creation of a new heaven and earth that will be totally righteous and without sin (2 Pt 3:13). The present working of the Holy Spirit in the believer is a foretaste of this future cosmic regeneration (Eph 1:13-14). The new heavens and earth are still future. But God’s renewal of his people, foreseen by the OT prophets, is already a reality (Is 65:17; 66:22; 2 Pt 3:13; Rv 21:1).<\/p>\n<p>The believer now possesses a new life from God through the process of spiritual birth. Christians are born of God (Jn 1:12-13). And it is only through this spiritual birth that one may participate in the kingdom of God and receive his Spirit. Those born into God’s family reflect his righteous character (1 Jn 2:29). They are freed from habitual sin (3:9; 5:18). In James 1:18 this process of birth is attributed to the power of the Word of God.<\/p>\n<p>Extending this metaphor for regeneration, Jesus taught Nicodemus about the absolute necessity of being born again, or born from above, as a prerequisite to entering the kingdom of God. Those who are thus reborn possess a living hope (1 Pt 1:3). Again, this new birth is brought about through the power of the Word of God (v 23).<\/p>\n<p>The initial experience of regeneration is followed by a continuing renewal in the life of the Christian. The newborn are to desire the pure milk of the Word of God in order to grow (1 Pt 2:2). Paul commands an ongoing transformation by the renewing of the mind (Rom 12:2; Eph 4:23). The new person remains in a process of constant renewal (Col 3:10), and the inner self is renewed daily (2 Cor 4:16).<\/p>\n<p>The present result of the new birth is a new person or new creation for whom old things are replaced by new (2 Cor 5:17). It is this new creation, rather than superficial participation in religious practices, that is the goal of the Christian life (Gal 6:15). It involves laying aside the old nature (Eph 4:22) and putting on the new nature (v 24). In the final analysis, however, this is never the result of human effort alone. We are God’s workmanship (2:10).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Conversion; Redeemer, Redemption; Repentance; Salvation.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>REGENERATION*<\/h3>\n<p>Spiritual rebirth producing a new beginning. It describes the new life of the believer in Christ (Ti 3:5) and the new order that will begin at Christ’s return (Mt 19:28). It occurs in the <span>kjv<\/span> of the Bible in only these two places. This does not mean, however, that the concept is unimportant. A variety of other words and figures are used frequently by the biblical writers to describe the same inner renewal of the heart.<\/p>\n<p>Secular writers also speak of regeneration. For the Stoic philosophers, it meant a return to a former state of existence. They referred to the yearly cycle of the seasons as a regeneration. For the biblical writers, however, regeneration means a renewal on a higher level. It is a radically new beginning rather than a mere restoration of previous conditions. This renewal involves a mighty change in the person. It is a work of the Holy Spirit, breaking the dominion of sin and implanting proper attitudes and desires. The regenerated person freely and joyously does the will of God. The ultimate goal of regeneration is the creation of a new heaven and earth that will be totally righteous and without sin (2 Pt 3:13). The present working of the Holy Spirit in the believer is a foretaste of this future cosmic regeneration (Eph 1:13-14). The new heavens and earth are still future. But God’s renewal of his people, foreseen by the OT prophets, is already a reality (Is 65:17; 66:22; 2 Pt 3:13; Rv 21:1).<\/p>\n<p>The believer now possesses a new life from God through the process of spiritual birth. Christians are born of God (Jn 1:12-13). And it is only through this spiritual birth that one may participate in the kingdom of God and receive his Spirit. Those born into God’s family reflect his righteous character (1 Jn 2:29). They are freed from habitual sin (3:9; 5:18). In James 1:18 this process of birth is attributed to the power of the Word of God.<\/p>\n<p>Extending this metaphor for regeneration, Jesus taught Nicodemus about the absolute necessity of being born again, or born from above, as a prerequisite to entering the kingdom of God. Those who are thus reborn possess a living hope (1 Pt 1:3). Again, this new birth is brought about through the power of the Word of God (v 23).<\/p>\n<p>The initial experience of regeneration is followed by a continuing renewal in the life of the Christian. The newborn are to desire the pure milk of the Word of God in order to grow (1 Pt 2:2). Paul commands an ongoing transformation by the renewing of the mind (Rom 12:2; Eph 4:23). The new person remains in a process of constant renewal (Col 3:10), and the inner self is renewed daily (2 Cor 4:16).<\/p>\n<p>The present result of the new birth is a new person or new creation for whom old things are replaced by new (2 Cor 5:17). It is this new creation, rather than superficial participation in religious practices, that is the goal of the Christian life (Gal 6:15). It involves laying aside the old nature (Eph 4:22) and putting on the new nature (v 24). In the final analysis, however, this is never the result of human effort alone. We are God’s workmanship (2:10).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Conversion; Redeemer, Redemption; Repentance; Salvation.<\/p>","summary_ro":"REGENERATION* Spiritual rebirth producing a new beginning. It describes the new life of the believer in Christ (Ti 3:5) and the new order that will begin at Christ’s return (Mt 19:28). It occurs in the kjv of the Bible in only these two places. This does not mean, however, that the concept is unimportant. A variety of other words and figures are used frequently by the biblical writers to describe the same inner renewal of the heart. Secular writers also speak of regeneration. For the Stoic ph...","summary_en":"REGENERATION* Spiritual rebirth producing a new beginning. It describes the new life of the believer in Christ (Ti 3:5) and the new order that will begin at Christ’s return (Mt 19:28). It occurs in the kjv of the Bible in only these two places. This does not mean, however, that the concept is unimportant. A variety of other words and figures are used frequently by the biblical writers to describe the same inner renewal of the heart. Secular writers also speak of regeneration. For the Stoic ph...","source":"Articles\/R.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":35905,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"and Daughters of God*, Sons","title_en":"and Daughters of God*, Sons","content_ro":"<h3>SONS AND DAUGHTERS OF GOD*<\/h3>\n<p>Expression designating human beings who have been born of God and have become part of his family. When the Bible speaks of God’s sons, it does not intend to exclude females. The term “sons” is inclusive of all believers. But the Scriptures nearly always have the word “sons”—with one exception in the NT, 2 Corinthians 6:18, in which God’s people are called “sons and daughters.”<\/p>\n<p>From the beginning, God the Father desired to have many sons and daughters sharing the image and likeness of his beloved Son. It could be said that his one Son brought him so much satisfaction that he yearned to have many more. This may have been the impetus for the creation of the universe and, most specifically, of human beings (see Gn 1:26-27). Proverbs 8 indicates that God was delighted with the sons of men. This is again expressed in the NT, especially in the book of Ephesians. The opening verses in Ephesians resound with this note: the heart’s desire of God was to obtain many sons in and through his Son. The many sons, in union with the unique Son, would bring great glory and satisfaction to the Father.<\/p>\n<p>Paul used a Greek word in Ephesians 1:5, 9, and 11 that conveys the idea of desire, even heart’s desire. The word is usually translated as “will”—“the will of God.” But the English word “will” conceals the primary meaning. The Greek word (<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">thelema<\/span>) is primarily an emotional word and secondarily volitional. God’s will is not so much God’s intention as it is God’s heart’s desire. God does have an intention, a purpose, a plan. It is called <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">prothesis<\/span> in Greek (see Eph 1:11), and it literally means “a laying out beforehand” (like a blueprint). This plan was created by God’s counsel (called <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">boule<\/span> in Greek, Eph 1:11). But behind the plan and the counsel was not just a mastermind but a heart of love and of good pleasure. Therefore, Paul talks about “the good pleasure of God’s heart’s desire” (v 5). Paul also says, “He made known to us the mystery of his heart’s desire, according to his good pleasure which he purposed in him” (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>The impetus of God’s eternal purpose came from a heart’s desire, and that heart’s desire was to have many sons made like his only Son (see Rom 8:26-28). In love, he predestined many people to participate in this “sonship”—not by their own merits but by virtue of their being united to the Son (Eph 1:4-5). Notice how often in Ephesians 1 Paul speaks of the believers’ position “in him.” Outside of him (the Son), no one could be a son of God and no one could be pleasing to the Father. The many sons and daughters owe all their divine privileges to the Beloved, as ones given grace through him (v 6). If it were not for God’s satisfaction in his beloved Son, there would not have been the inspiration for the creation of man in the first place. Humans exist because God wanted to obtain many sons and daughters, each bearing the image of God’s unique Son. People are well pleasing to God and bring him satisfaction by being united to the one who has always satisfied him. Apart from the Son, no one has access to the Father. But because of the Son’s redemption, all believers have the right to become children of God (Jn 1:12) and now have access to the Father through the Son (14:6).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SONS AND DAUGHTERS OF GOD*<\/h3>\n<p>Expression designating human beings who have been born of God and have become part of his family. When the Bible speaks of God’s sons, it does not intend to exclude females. The term “sons” is inclusive of all believers. But the Scriptures nearly always have the word “sons”—with one exception in the NT, 2 Corinthians 6:18, in which God’s people are called “sons and daughters.”<\/p>\n<p>From the beginning, God the Father desired to have many sons and daughters sharing the image and likeness of his beloved Son. It could be said that his one Son brought him so much satisfaction that he yearned to have many more. This may have been the impetus for the creation of the universe and, most specifically, of human beings (see Gn 1:26-27). Proverbs 8 indicates that God was delighted with the sons of men. This is again expressed in the NT, especially in the book of Ephesians. The opening verses in Ephesians resound with this note: the heart’s desire of God was to obtain many sons in and through his Son. The many sons, in union with the unique Son, would bring great glory and satisfaction to the Father.<\/p>\n<p>Paul used a Greek word in Ephesians 1:5, 9, and 11 that conveys the idea of desire, even heart’s desire. The word is usually translated as “will”—“the will of God.” But the English word “will” conceals the primary meaning. The Greek word (<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">thelema<\/span>) is primarily an emotional word and secondarily volitional. God’s will is not so much God’s intention as it is God’s heart’s desire. God does have an intention, a purpose, a plan. It is called <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">prothesis<\/span> in Greek (see Eph 1:11), and it literally means “a laying out beforehand” (like a blueprint). This plan was created by God’s counsel (called <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">boule<\/span> in Greek, Eph 1:11). But behind the plan and the counsel was not just a mastermind but a heart of love and of good pleasure. Therefore, Paul talks about “the good pleasure of God’s heart’s desire” (v 5). Paul also says, “He made known to us the mystery of his heart’s desire, according to his good pleasure which he purposed in him” (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>The impetus of God’s eternal purpose came from a heart’s desire, and that heart’s desire was to have many sons made like his only Son (see Rom 8:26-28). In love, he predestined many people to participate in this “sonship”—not by their own merits but by virtue of their being united to the Son (Eph 1:4-5). Notice how often in Ephesians 1 Paul speaks of the believers’ position “in him.” Outside of him (the Son), no one could be a son of God and no one could be pleasing to the Father. The many sons and daughters owe all their divine privileges to the Beloved, as ones given grace through him (v 6). If it were not for God’s satisfaction in his beloved Son, there would not have been the inspiration for the creation of man in the first place. Humans exist because God wanted to obtain many sons and daughters, each bearing the image of God’s unique Son. People are well pleasing to God and bring him satisfaction by being united to the one who has always satisfied him. Apart from the Son, no one has access to the Father. But because of the Son’s redemption, all believers have the right to become children of God (Jn 1:12) and now have access to the Father through the Son (14:6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"SONS AND DAUGHTERS OF GOD* Expression designating human beings who have been born of God and have become part of his family. When the Bible speaks of God’s sons, it does not intend to exclude females. The term “sons” is inclusive of all believers. But the Scriptures nearly always have the word “sons”—with one exception in the NT, 2 Corinthians 6:18, in which God’s people are called “sons and daughters.” From the beginning, God the Father desired to have many sons and daughters sharing the ima...","summary_en":"SONS AND DAUGHTERS OF GOD* Expression designating human beings who have been born of God and have become part of his family. When the Bible speaks of God’s sons, it does not intend to exclude females. The term “sons” is inclusive of all believers. But the Scriptures nearly always have the word “sons”—with one exception in the NT, 2 Corinthians 6:18, in which God’s people are called “sons and daughters.” From the beginning, God the Father desired to have many sons and daughters sharing the ima...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56314,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:12","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:12","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:12<\/strong> Only through divine renewal can people follow the light and enter God’s family (3:1-17). • Individuals must believe in Christ <em>to become children of God<\/em> (12:35-36).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:12<\/strong> Only through divine renewal can people follow the light and enter God’s family (3:1-17). • Individuals must believe in Christ <em>to become children of God<\/em> (12:35-36).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:12 Only through divine renewal can people follow the light and enter God’s family (3:1-17). • Individuals must believe in Christ to become children of God (12:35-36).","summary_en":"1:12 Only through divine renewal can people follow the light and enter God’s family (3:1-17). • Individuals must believe in Christ to become children of God (12:35-36).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83940,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:12","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:12","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:12<\/strong> Only through divine renewal can people follow the light and enter God’s family (3:1-17). • Individuals must believe in Christ <em>to become children of God<\/em> (12:35-36).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:12<\/strong> Only through divine renewal can people follow the light and enter God’s family (3:1-17). • Individuals must believe in Christ <em>to become children of God<\/em> (12:35-36).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:12 Only through divine renewal can people follow the light and enter God’s family (3:1-17). • Individuals must believe in Christ to become children of God (12:35-36).","summary_en":"1:12 Only through divine renewal can people follow the light and enter God’s family (3:1-17). • Individuals must believe in Christ to become children of God (12:35-36).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111566,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:12","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:12","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:12<\/strong> Only through divine renewal can people follow the light and enter God’s family (3:1-17). • Individuals must believe in Christ <em>to become children of God<\/em> (12:35-36).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:12<\/strong> Only through divine renewal can people follow the light and enter God’s family (3:1-17). • Individuals must believe in Christ <em>to become children of God<\/em> (12:35-36).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:12 Only through divine renewal can people follow the light and enter God’s family (3:1-17). • Individuals must believe in Christ to become children of God (12:35-36).","summary_en":"1:12 Only through divine renewal can people follow the light and enter God’s family (3:1-17). • Individuals must believe in Christ to become children of God (12:35-36).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139192,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:12","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:12","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:12<\/strong> Only through divine renewal can people follow the light and enter God’s family (3:1-17). • Individuals must believe in Christ <em>to become children of God<\/em> (12:35-36).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:12<\/strong> Only through divine renewal can people follow the light and enter God’s family (3:1-17). • Individuals must believe in Christ <em>to become children of God<\/em> (12:35-36).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:12 Only through divine renewal can people follow the light and enter God’s family (3:1-17). • Individuals must believe in Christ to become children of God (12:35-36).","summary_en":"1:12 Only through divine renewal can people follow the light and enter God’s family (3:1-17). • Individuals must believe in Christ to become children of God (12:35-36).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64419,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Divine Sovereignty and Human Responsibility","title_en":"Divine Sovereignty and Human Responsibility","content_ro":"<h3>Divine Sovereignty and Human Responsibility<\/h3>\n<p>The Bible ultimately traces all things back to God’s sovereignty. For example, the fact that the rain falls on the just and unjust alike is part of God’s sovereign plan (Matt 5:45).<\/p>\n<p>At the same time, God is in no way responsible for our sin; it is our responsibility because it comes from our own sinful desires. Scripture repeatedly demonstrates that people have the ability to choose to follow God or to reject him (see, e.g., Deut 30:15-20; Josh 24:15; John 1:12; Rom 10:9-13). God does not coerce people to have faith in him.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel 14:9-11 describes an intriguing situation in which God deceives a prophet but then also holds that same prophet accountable for his actions. This leads to a difficult question: How can we reconcile God’s sovereign control over all things with the personal choices and decisions for which we will be called to account?<\/p>\n<p>In giving misleading messages to false prophets, God was simply giving them and their hearers exactly what they wanted (cp. 2 Thes 2:11). Even a false prophet could give a prophecy that led people astray only with the Lord’s permission or direction. Unless God restrained them from their sin, they would choose lies instead of the truth and worship creation in place of the Creator (Rom 1:18-25). God simply gave them permission to enact their hearts’ sinful desires.<\/p>\n<p>The remarkable fact is not that God allows some sinners to persist in their chosen delusions, but that he saves sinners, changes our natures, and gives us the desire to do good for his glory (see Ezek 36:25-26; Rom 8:1-11; Eph 2:10). While we may not be able to completely reconcile this complex tension, we can be assured of the freely offered grace of God and the new life that he gives through his Spirit to all who trust in him.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 2:6-7; 1 Kgs 22:19-22; 2 Chr 20:6; Job 1:8-12; 2:2-6; Pss 115:3; 135:6-14; Isa 45:6-7; Lam 3:37-40; Ezek 14:9-11; 17:24; 36:25-26; Dan 2:20-22; Amos 3:6; 4:6-11; Rom 1:18-25; 9:8-33; 12:2; Eph 4:20-24; 2 Thes 2:11-12; Heb 13:20-21; Jas 1:13-14; 4:12-16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Divine Sovereignty and Human Responsibility<\/h3>\n<p>The Bible ultimately traces all things back to God’s sovereignty. For example, the fact that the rain falls on the just and unjust alike is part of God’s sovereign plan (Matt 5:45).<\/p>\n<p>At the same time, God is in no way responsible for our sin; it is our responsibility because it comes from our own sinful desires. Scripture repeatedly demonstrates that people have the ability to choose to follow God or to reject him (see, e.g., Deut 30:15-20; Josh 24:15; John 1:12; Rom 10:9-13). God does not coerce people to have faith in him.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel 14:9-11 describes an intriguing situation in which God deceives a prophet but then also holds that same prophet accountable for his actions. This leads to a difficult question: How can we reconcile God’s sovereign control over all things with the personal choices and decisions for which we will be called to account?<\/p>\n<p>In giving misleading messages to false prophets, God was simply giving them and their hearers exactly what they wanted (cp. 2 Thes 2:11). Even a false prophet could give a prophecy that led people astray only with the Lord’s permission or direction. Unless God restrained them from their sin, they would choose lies instead of the truth and worship creation in place of the Creator (Rom 1:18-25). God simply gave them permission to enact their hearts’ sinful desires.<\/p>\n<p>The remarkable fact is not that God allows some sinners to persist in their chosen delusions, but that he saves sinners, changes our natures, and gives us the desire to do good for his glory (see Ezek 36:25-26; Rom 8:1-11; Eph 2:10). While we may not be able to completely reconcile this complex tension, we can be assured of the freely offered grace of God and the new life that he gives through his Spirit to all who trust in him.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 2:6-7; 1 Kgs 22:19-22; 2 Chr 20:6; Job 1:8-12; 2:2-6; Pss 115:3; 135:6-14; Isa 45:6-7; Lam 3:37-40; Ezek 14:9-11; 17:24; 36:25-26; Dan 2:20-22; Amos 3:6; 4:6-11; Rom 1:18-25; 9:8-33; 12:2; Eph 4:20-24; 2 Thes 2:11-12; Heb 13:20-21; Jas 1:13-14; 4:12-16<\/p>","summary_ro":"Divine Sovereignty and Human Responsibility The Bible ultimately traces all things back to God’s sovereignty. For example, the fact that the rain falls on the just and unjust alike is part of God’s sovereign plan (Matt 5:45). At the same time, God is in no way responsible for our sin; it is our responsibility because it comes from our own sinful desires. Scripture repeatedly demonstrates that people have the ability to choose to follow God or to reject him (see, e.g., Deut 30:15-20; Josh 24:1...","summary_en":"Divine Sovereignty and Human Responsibility The Bible ultimately traces all things back to God’s sovereignty. For example, the fact that the rain falls on the just and unjust alike is part of God’s sovereign plan (Matt 5:45). At the same time, God is in no way responsible for our sin; it is our responsibility because it comes from our own sinful desires. Scripture repeatedly demonstrates that people have the ability to choose to follow God or to reject him (see, e.g., Deut 30:15-20; Josh 24:1...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65508,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Following Jesus","title_en":"Following Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","summary_en":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65878,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John","title_en":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>“Belief” in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun <em>faith<\/em> that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb <em>believe<\/em> to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, the verb translated “believe” is often followed by the Greek preposition <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eis<\/span> (“into”). No parallel exists for this combination in ancient Greek usage. For John, faith is not a status, but an investment in the person of Jesus. Faith means accepting who Jesus is and what he claims to be. Faith constitutes a commitment to let his call change the way we live. Faith is the work God wants from us (John 6:29), demonstrated as we abide in Jesus’ word, as we love him, and as we obey his commands (John 8:31; 15:1-17; see 1 Jn 5:10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; Isa 28:16; Mark 1:15; 9:23-24; John 1:12-13; 3:10-18; 5:24; 6:35-36; 7:38; 9:35-38; 11:25-27; 12:37; 20:25-31; Acts 10:43; 13:39; Rom 1:16; 10:9-10; Heb 4:3<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>“Belief” in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun <em>faith<\/em> that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb <em>believe<\/em> to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, the verb translated “believe” is often followed by the Greek preposition <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eis<\/span> (“into”). No parallel exists for this combination in ancient Greek usage. For John, faith is not a status, but an investment in the person of Jesus. Faith means accepting who Jesus is and what he claims to be. Faith constitutes a commitment to let his call change the way we live. Faith is the work God wants from us (John 6:29), demonstrated as we abide in Jesus’ word, as we love him, and as we obey his commands (John 8:31; 15:1-17; see 1 Jn 5:10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; Isa 28:16; Mark 1:15; 9:23-24; John 1:12-13; 3:10-18; 5:24; 6:35-36; 7:38; 9:35-38; 11:25-27; 12:37; 20:25-31; Acts 10:43; 13:39; Rom 1:16; 10:9-10; Heb 4:3<\/p>","summary_ro":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun faith that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb believe to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples. In the Gospel of ...","summary_en":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun faith that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb believe to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples. In the Gospel of ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66396,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miracles","title_en":"Miracles","content_ro":"<h3>Miracles<\/h3>\n<p>Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in more than the miracle itself (see John 12:37). Miracles remind us of the truth that anything is possible for God (Mark 9:21-23; cp. Matt 19:26; Mark 10:27; Luke 1:37; 18:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus performed many miracles during his ministry including physical healings, exorcisms, nature miracles, and raising the dead. Jesus demonstrated a deep love for humankind in the way he responded to people’s needs, and many people followed him in response to his miracles (John 6:2), though he cautioned against following him just because of the miracles (John 6:26). Perhaps the three greatest miracles that occurred in relation to Jesus are (1) his coming as the Word of God in human flesh (John 1:14), (2) his glorious resurrection from the dead (Matt 28; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-53; John 20:1-31; Acts 1:3; 1 Cor 15:3-8; cp Acts 23:6; 26:8), and (3) the miracle of the new birth (John 3:3-8; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:8-10). The coming of Jesus into the world to be the Savior and to die for our sins shows us how much God loves us (John 3:16; Rom 5:8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5; 1 Jn 3:1-2). The fact that God raised Jesus from the dead reveals God’s power over death and gives us a living hope, the promise of eternal life (1 Pet 1:3-9). And the person who puts faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord is born anew as a child of God and receives eternal life (John 1:12; 3:36; Rom 5:1-2; 1 Jn 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>The miraculous activity of Jesus continued in the work of his followers, as demonstrated throughout the book of Acts (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-15; 6:8; 8:6-7; 9:32-42; 14:3). Filled with the Holy Spirit, the apostles and other Christian leaders performed these miraculous signs, wonders, and mighty works, often in order to offer tangible evidence of the power and truth of the Christian message (14:3; see John 3:2; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 19:23-26; 28:1-20; Mark 10:23-27; Luke 1:30-38; 18:24-27; 24:1-53; John 1:12-14; 3:2-8, 16; 20:1–21:25; Acts 4:29-31; 5:12-16; 6:8; 8:4-23; 9:32-42; 14:3-4; 26:8; Rom 5:1, 8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5, 8-10; Heb 2:4; 1 Pet 1:3-5; 1 Jn 5:12-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miracles<\/h3>\n<p>Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in more than the miracle itself (see John 12:37). Miracles remind us of the truth that anything is possible for God (Mark 9:21-23; cp. Matt 19:26; Mark 10:27; Luke 1:37; 18:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus performed many miracles during his ministry including physical healings, exorcisms, nature miracles, and raising the dead. Jesus demonstrated a deep love for humankind in the way he responded to people’s needs, and many people followed him in response to his miracles (John 6:2), though he cautioned against following him just because of the miracles (John 6:26). Perhaps the three greatest miracles that occurred in relation to Jesus are (1) his coming as the Word of God in human flesh (John 1:14), (2) his glorious resurrection from the dead (Matt 28; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-53; John 20:1-31; Acts 1:3; 1 Cor 15:3-8; cp Acts 23:6; 26:8), and (3) the miracle of the new birth (John 3:3-8; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:8-10). The coming of Jesus into the world to be the Savior and to die for our sins shows us how much God loves us (John 3:16; Rom 5:8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5; 1 Jn 3:1-2). The fact that God raised Jesus from the dead reveals God’s power over death and gives us a living hope, the promise of eternal life (1 Pet 1:3-9). And the person who puts faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord is born anew as a child of God and receives eternal life (John 1:12; 3:36; Rom 5:1-2; 1 Jn 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>The miraculous activity of Jesus continued in the work of his followers, as demonstrated throughout the book of Acts (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-15; 6:8; 8:6-7; 9:32-42; 14:3). Filled with the Holy Spirit, the apostles and other Christian leaders performed these miraculous signs, wonders, and mighty works, often in order to offer tangible evidence of the power and truth of the Christian message (14:3; see John 3:2; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 19:23-26; 28:1-20; Mark 10:23-27; Luke 1:30-38; 18:24-27; 24:1-53; John 1:12-14; 3:2-8, 16; 20:1–21:25; Acts 4:29-31; 5:12-16; 6:8; 8:4-23; 9:32-42; 14:3-4; 26:8; Rom 5:1, 8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5, 8-10; Heb 2:4; 1 Pet 1:3-5; 1 Jn 5:12-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miracles Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in ...","summary_en":"Miracles Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":67672,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Word","title_en":"God’s Word","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Word<\/h3>\n<p>A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the universe and still governs it (Gen 1:3-28; Heb 1:3; 11:3).<\/p>\n<p>In the past, God’s word came primarily through angels or prophets, but now it has come preeminently in the person of Jesus, God’s Son (Heb 1:1-4; 2:3-4; cp. John 1:1-14). The word is to be heard, heeded, obeyed, and believed as a source of hope.<\/p>\n<p>Through his word, God initiates relationship with us and wants us to listen to him and respond in faith (see Gen 15:6; John 1:12). His word is authoritative and intentional, and it gives profound hope because God can be trusted to keep his promises (Heb 6:13-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-28; Deut 8:3; Pss 12:6; 19:8; 119:11, 89, 105; Isa 40:8; Jer 15:16; 23:29; 36:2; Matt 5:18; 7:24; John 1:1-14; 5:24; 2 Tim 3:16; Heb 1:1-4; 4:12; 6:13-20; 11:3; 1 Pet 1:25; 2 Pet 1:19-21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Word<\/h3>\n<p>A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the universe and still governs it (Gen 1:3-28; Heb 1:3; 11:3).<\/p>\n<p>In the past, God’s word came primarily through angels or prophets, but now it has come preeminently in the person of Jesus, God’s Son (Heb 1:1-4; 2:3-4; cp. John 1:1-14). The word is to be heard, heeded, obeyed, and believed as a source of hope.<\/p>\n<p>Through his word, God initiates relationship with us and wants us to listen to him and respond in faith (see Gen 15:6; John 1:12). His word is authoritative and intentional, and it gives profound hope because God can be trusted to keep his promises (Heb 6:13-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-28; Deut 8:3; Pss 12:6; 19:8; 119:11, 89, 105; Isa 40:8; Jer 15:16; 23:29; 36:2; Matt 5:18; 7:24; John 1:1-14; 5:24; 2 Tim 3:16; Heb 1:1-4; 4:12; 6:13-20; 11:3; 1 Pet 1:25; 2 Pet 1:19-21<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Word A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the ...","summary_en":"God’s Word A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92045,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Divine Sovereignty and Human Responsibility","title_en":"Divine Sovereignty and Human Responsibility","content_ro":"<h3>Divine Sovereignty and Human Responsibility<\/h3>\n<p>The Bible ultimately traces all things back to God’s sovereignty. For example, the fact that the rain falls on the just and unjust alike is part of God’s sovereign plan (Matt 5:45).<\/p>\n<p>At the same time, God is in no way responsible for our sin; it is our responsibility because it comes from our own sinful desires. Scripture repeatedly demonstrates that people have the ability to choose to follow God or to reject him (see, e.g., Deut 30:15-20; Josh 24:15; John 1:12; Rom 10:9-13). God does not coerce people to have faith in him.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel 14:9-11 describes an intriguing situation in which God deceives a prophet but then also holds that same prophet accountable for his actions. This leads to a difficult question: How can we reconcile God’s sovereign control over all things with the personal choices and decisions for which we will be called to account?<\/p>\n<p>In giving misleading messages to false prophets, God was simply giving them and their hearers exactly what they wanted (cp. 2 Thes 2:11). Even a false prophet could give a prophecy that led people astray only with the Lord’s permission or direction. Unless God restrained them from their sin, they would choose lies instead of the truth and worship creation in place of the Creator (Rom 1:18-25). God simply gave them permission to enact their hearts’ sinful desires.<\/p>\n<p>The remarkable fact is not that God allows some sinners to persist in their chosen delusions, but that he saves sinners, changes our natures, and gives us the desire to do good for his glory (see Ezek 36:25-26; Rom 8:1-11; Eph 2:10). While we may not be able to completely reconcile this complex tension, we can be assured of the freely offered grace of God and the new life that he gives through his Spirit to all who trust in him.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 2:6-7; 1 Kgs 22:19-22; 2 Chr 20:6; Job 1:8-12; 2:2-6; Pss 115:3; 135:6-14; Isa 45:6-7; Lam 3:37-40; Ezek 14:9-11; 17:24; 36:25-26; Dan 2:20-22; Amos 3:6; 4:6-11; Rom 1:18-25; 9:8-33; 12:2; Eph 4:20-24; 2 Thes 2:11-12; Heb 13:20-21; Jas 1:13-14; 4:12-16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Divine Sovereignty and Human Responsibility<\/h3>\n<p>The Bible ultimately traces all things back to God’s sovereignty. For example, the fact that the rain falls on the just and unjust alike is part of God’s sovereign plan (Matt 5:45).<\/p>\n<p>At the same time, God is in no way responsible for our sin; it is our responsibility because it comes from our own sinful desires. Scripture repeatedly demonstrates that people have the ability to choose to follow God or to reject him (see, e.g., Deut 30:15-20; Josh 24:15; John 1:12; Rom 10:9-13). God does not coerce people to have faith in him.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel 14:9-11 describes an intriguing situation in which God deceives a prophet but then also holds that same prophet accountable for his actions. This leads to a difficult question: How can we reconcile God’s sovereign control over all things with the personal choices and decisions for which we will be called to account?<\/p>\n<p>In giving misleading messages to false prophets, God was simply giving them and their hearers exactly what they wanted (cp. 2 Thes 2:11). Even a false prophet could give a prophecy that led people astray only with the Lord’s permission or direction. Unless God restrained them from their sin, they would choose lies instead of the truth and worship creation in place of the Creator (Rom 1:18-25). God simply gave them permission to enact their hearts’ sinful desires.<\/p>\n<p>The remarkable fact is not that God allows some sinners to persist in their chosen delusions, but that he saves sinners, changes our natures, and gives us the desire to do good for his glory (see Ezek 36:25-26; Rom 8:1-11; Eph 2:10). While we may not be able to completely reconcile this complex tension, we can be assured of the freely offered grace of God and the new life that he gives through his Spirit to all who trust in him.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 2:6-7; 1 Kgs 22:19-22; 2 Chr 20:6; Job 1:8-12; 2:2-6; Pss 115:3; 135:6-14; Isa 45:6-7; Lam 3:37-40; Ezek 14:9-11; 17:24; 36:25-26; Dan 2:20-22; Amos 3:6; 4:6-11; Rom 1:18-25; 9:8-33; 12:2; Eph 4:20-24; 2 Thes 2:11-12; Heb 13:20-21; Jas 1:13-14; 4:12-16<\/p>","summary_ro":"Divine Sovereignty and Human Responsibility The Bible ultimately traces all things back to God’s sovereignty. For example, the fact that the rain falls on the just and unjust alike is part of God’s sovereign plan (Matt 5:45). At the same time, God is in no way responsible for our sin; it is our responsibility because it comes from our own sinful desires. Scripture repeatedly demonstrates that people have the ability to choose to follow God or to reject him (see, e.g., Deut 30:15-20; Josh 24:1...","summary_en":"Divine Sovereignty and Human Responsibility The Bible ultimately traces all things back to God’s sovereignty. For example, the fact that the rain falls on the just and unjust alike is part of God’s sovereign plan (Matt 5:45). At the same time, God is in no way responsible for our sin; it is our responsibility because it comes from our own sinful desires. Scripture repeatedly demonstrates that people have the ability to choose to follow God or to reject him (see, e.g., Deut 30:15-20; Josh 24:1...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93134,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Following Jesus","title_en":"Following Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","summary_en":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93504,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John","title_en":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>“Belief” in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun <em>faith<\/em> that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb <em>believe<\/em> to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, the verb translated “believe” is often followed by the Greek preposition <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eis<\/span> (“into”). No parallel exists for this combination in ancient Greek usage. For John, faith is not a status, but an investment in the person of Jesus. Faith means accepting who Jesus is and what he claims to be. Faith constitutes a commitment to let his call change the way we live. Faith is the work God wants from us (John 6:29), demonstrated as we abide in Jesus’ word, as we love him, and as we obey his commands (John 8:31; 15:1-17; see 1 Jn 5:10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; Isa 28:16; Mark 1:15; 9:23-24; John 1:12-13; 3:10-18; 5:24; 6:35-36; 7:38; 9:35-38; 11:25-27; 12:37; 20:25-31; Acts 10:43; 13:39; Rom 1:16; 10:9-10; Heb 4:3<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>“Belief” in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun <em>faith<\/em> that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb <em>believe<\/em> to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, the verb translated “believe” is often followed by the Greek preposition <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eis<\/span> (“into”). No parallel exists for this combination in ancient Greek usage. For John, faith is not a status, but an investment in the person of Jesus. Faith means accepting who Jesus is and what he claims to be. Faith constitutes a commitment to let his call change the way we live. Faith is the work God wants from us (John 6:29), demonstrated as we abide in Jesus’ word, as we love him, and as we obey his commands (John 8:31; 15:1-17; see 1 Jn 5:10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; Isa 28:16; Mark 1:15; 9:23-24; John 1:12-13; 3:10-18; 5:24; 6:35-36; 7:38; 9:35-38; 11:25-27; 12:37; 20:25-31; Acts 10:43; 13:39; Rom 1:16; 10:9-10; Heb 4:3<\/p>","summary_ro":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun faith that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb believe to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples. In the Gospel of ...","summary_en":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun faith that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb believe to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples. In the Gospel of ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":94022,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miracles","title_en":"Miracles","content_ro":"<h3>Miracles<\/h3>\n<p>Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in more than the miracle itself (see John 12:37). Miracles remind us of the truth that anything is possible for God (Mark 9:21-23; cp. Matt 19:26; Mark 10:27; Luke 1:37; 18:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus performed many miracles during his ministry including physical healings, exorcisms, nature miracles, and raising the dead. Jesus demonstrated a deep love for humankind in the way he responded to people’s needs, and many people followed him in response to his miracles (John 6:2), though he cautioned against following him just because of the miracles (John 6:26). Perhaps the three greatest miracles that occurred in relation to Jesus are (1) his coming as the Word of God in human flesh (John 1:14), (2) his glorious resurrection from the dead (Matt 28; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-53; John 20:1-31; Acts 1:3; 1 Cor 15:3-8; cp Acts 23:6; 26:8), and (3) the miracle of the new birth (John 3:3-8; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:8-10). The coming of Jesus into the world to be the Savior and to die for our sins shows us how much God loves us (John 3:16; Rom 5:8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5; 1 Jn 3:1-2). The fact that God raised Jesus from the dead reveals God’s power over death and gives us a living hope, the promise of eternal life (1 Pet 1:3-9). And the person who puts faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord is born anew as a child of God and receives eternal life (John 1:12; 3:36; Rom 5:1-2; 1 Jn 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>The miraculous activity of Jesus continued in the work of his followers, as demonstrated throughout the book of Acts (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-15; 6:8; 8:6-7; 9:32-42; 14:3). Filled with the Holy Spirit, the apostles and other Christian leaders performed these miraculous signs, wonders, and mighty works, often in order to offer tangible evidence of the power and truth of the Christian message (14:3; see John 3:2; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 19:23-26; 28:1-20; Mark 10:23-27; Luke 1:30-38; 18:24-27; 24:1-53; John 1:12-14; 3:2-8, 16; 20:1–21:25; Acts 4:29-31; 5:12-16; 6:8; 8:4-23; 9:32-42; 14:3-4; 26:8; Rom 5:1, 8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5, 8-10; Heb 2:4; 1 Pet 1:3-5; 1 Jn 5:12-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miracles<\/h3>\n<p>Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in more than the miracle itself (see John 12:37). Miracles remind us of the truth that anything is possible for God (Mark 9:21-23; cp. Matt 19:26; Mark 10:27; Luke 1:37; 18:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus performed many miracles during his ministry including physical healings, exorcisms, nature miracles, and raising the dead. Jesus demonstrated a deep love for humankind in the way he responded to people’s needs, and many people followed him in response to his miracles (John 6:2), though he cautioned against following him just because of the miracles (John 6:26). Perhaps the three greatest miracles that occurred in relation to Jesus are (1) his coming as the Word of God in human flesh (John 1:14), (2) his glorious resurrection from the dead (Matt 28; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-53; John 20:1-31; Acts 1:3; 1 Cor 15:3-8; cp Acts 23:6; 26:8), and (3) the miracle of the new birth (John 3:3-8; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:8-10). The coming of Jesus into the world to be the Savior and to die for our sins shows us how much God loves us (John 3:16; Rom 5:8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5; 1 Jn 3:1-2). The fact that God raised Jesus from the dead reveals God’s power over death and gives us a living hope, the promise of eternal life (1 Pet 1:3-9). And the person who puts faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord is born anew as a child of God and receives eternal life (John 1:12; 3:36; Rom 5:1-2; 1 Jn 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>The miraculous activity of Jesus continued in the work of his followers, as demonstrated throughout the book of Acts (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-15; 6:8; 8:6-7; 9:32-42; 14:3). Filled with the Holy Spirit, the apostles and other Christian leaders performed these miraculous signs, wonders, and mighty works, often in order to offer tangible evidence of the power and truth of the Christian message (14:3; see John 3:2; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 19:23-26; 28:1-20; Mark 10:23-27; Luke 1:30-38; 18:24-27; 24:1-53; John 1:12-14; 3:2-8, 16; 20:1–21:25; Acts 4:29-31; 5:12-16; 6:8; 8:4-23; 9:32-42; 14:3-4; 26:8; Rom 5:1, 8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5, 8-10; Heb 2:4; 1 Pet 1:3-5; 1 Jn 5:12-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miracles Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in ...","summary_en":"Miracles Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":95298,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Word","title_en":"God’s Word","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Word<\/h3>\n<p>A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the universe and still governs it (Gen 1:3-28; Heb 1:3; 11:3).<\/p>\n<p>In the past, God’s word came primarily through angels or prophets, but now it has come preeminently in the person of Jesus, God’s Son (Heb 1:1-4; 2:3-4; cp. John 1:1-14). The word is to be heard, heeded, obeyed, and believed as a source of hope.<\/p>\n<p>Through his word, God initiates relationship with us and wants us to listen to him and respond in faith (see Gen 15:6; John 1:12). His word is authoritative and intentional, and it gives profound hope because God can be trusted to keep his promises (Heb 6:13-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-28; Deut 8:3; Pss 12:6; 19:8; 119:11, 89, 105; Isa 40:8; Jer 15:16; 23:29; 36:2; Matt 5:18; 7:24; John 1:1-14; 5:24; 2 Tim 3:16; Heb 1:1-4; 4:12; 6:13-20; 11:3; 1 Pet 1:25; 2 Pet 1:19-21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Word<\/h3>\n<p>A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the universe and still governs it (Gen 1:3-28; Heb 1:3; 11:3).<\/p>\n<p>In the past, God’s word came primarily through angels or prophets, but now it has come preeminently in the person of Jesus, God’s Son (Heb 1:1-4; 2:3-4; cp. John 1:1-14). The word is to be heard, heeded, obeyed, and believed as a source of hope.<\/p>\n<p>Through his word, God initiates relationship with us and wants us to listen to him and respond in faith (see Gen 15:6; John 1:12). His word is authoritative and intentional, and it gives profound hope because God can be trusted to keep his promises (Heb 6:13-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-28; Deut 8:3; Pss 12:6; 19:8; 119:11, 89, 105; Isa 40:8; Jer 15:16; 23:29; 36:2; Matt 5:18; 7:24; John 1:1-14; 5:24; 2 Tim 3:16; Heb 1:1-4; 4:12; 6:13-20; 11:3; 1 Pet 1:25; 2 Pet 1:19-21<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Word A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the ...","summary_en":"God’s Word A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":119671,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Divine Sovereignty and Human Responsibility","title_en":"Divine Sovereignty and Human Responsibility","content_ro":"<h3>Divine Sovereignty and Human Responsibility<\/h3>\n<p>The Bible ultimately traces all things back to God’s sovereignty. For example, the fact that the rain falls on the just and unjust alike is part of God’s sovereign plan (Matt 5:45).<\/p>\n<p>At the same time, God is in no way responsible for our sin; it is our responsibility because it comes from our own sinful desires. Scripture repeatedly demonstrates that people have the ability to choose to follow God or to reject him (see, e.g., Deut 30:15-20; Josh 24:15; John 1:12; Rom 10:9-13). God does not coerce people to have faith in him.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel 14:9-11 describes an intriguing situation in which God deceives a prophet but then also holds that same prophet accountable for his actions. This leads to a difficult question: How can we reconcile God’s sovereign control over all things with the personal choices and decisions for which we will be called to account?<\/p>\n<p>In giving misleading messages to false prophets, God was simply giving them and their hearers exactly what they wanted (cp. 2 Thes 2:11). Even a false prophet could give a prophecy that led people astray only with the Lord’s permission or direction. Unless God restrained them from their sin, they would choose lies instead of the truth and worship creation in place of the Creator (Rom 1:18-25). God simply gave them permission to enact their hearts’ sinful desires.<\/p>\n<p>The remarkable fact is not that God allows some sinners to persist in their chosen delusions, but that he saves sinners, changes our natures, and gives us the desire to do good for his glory (see Ezek 36:25-26; Rom 8:1-11; Eph 2:10). While we may not be able to completely reconcile this complex tension, we can be assured of the freely offered grace of God and the new life that he gives through his Spirit to all who trust in him.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 2:6-7; 1 Kgs 22:19-22; 2 Chr 20:6; Job 1:8-12; 2:2-6; Pss 115:3; 135:6-14; Isa 45:6-7; Lam 3:37-40; Ezek 14:9-11; 17:24; 36:25-26; Dan 2:20-22; Amos 3:6; 4:6-11; Rom 1:18-25; 9:8-33; 12:2; Eph 4:20-24; 2 Thes 2:11-12; Heb 13:20-21; Jas 1:13-14; 4:12-16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Divine Sovereignty and Human Responsibility<\/h3>\n<p>The Bible ultimately traces all things back to God’s sovereignty. For example, the fact that the rain falls on the just and unjust alike is part of God’s sovereign plan (Matt 5:45).<\/p>\n<p>At the same time, God is in no way responsible for our sin; it is our responsibility because it comes from our own sinful desires. Scripture repeatedly demonstrates that people have the ability to choose to follow God or to reject him (see, e.g., Deut 30:15-20; Josh 24:15; John 1:12; Rom 10:9-13). God does not coerce people to have faith in him.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel 14:9-11 describes an intriguing situation in which God deceives a prophet but then also holds that same prophet accountable for his actions. This leads to a difficult question: How can we reconcile God’s sovereign control over all things with the personal choices and decisions for which we will be called to account?<\/p>\n<p>In giving misleading messages to false prophets, God was simply giving them and their hearers exactly what they wanted (cp. 2 Thes 2:11). Even a false prophet could give a prophecy that led people astray only with the Lord’s permission or direction. Unless God restrained them from their sin, they would choose lies instead of the truth and worship creation in place of the Creator (Rom 1:18-25). God simply gave them permission to enact their hearts’ sinful desires.<\/p>\n<p>The remarkable fact is not that God allows some sinners to persist in their chosen delusions, but that he saves sinners, changes our natures, and gives us the desire to do good for his glory (see Ezek 36:25-26; Rom 8:1-11; Eph 2:10). While we may not be able to completely reconcile this complex tension, we can be assured of the freely offered grace of God and the new life that he gives through his Spirit to all who trust in him.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 2:6-7; 1 Kgs 22:19-22; 2 Chr 20:6; Job 1:8-12; 2:2-6; Pss 115:3; 135:6-14; Isa 45:6-7; Lam 3:37-40; Ezek 14:9-11; 17:24; 36:25-26; Dan 2:20-22; Amos 3:6; 4:6-11; Rom 1:18-25; 9:8-33; 12:2; Eph 4:20-24; 2 Thes 2:11-12; Heb 13:20-21; Jas 1:13-14; 4:12-16<\/p>","summary_ro":"Divine Sovereignty and Human Responsibility The Bible ultimately traces all things back to God’s sovereignty. For example, the fact that the rain falls on the just and unjust alike is part of God’s sovereign plan (Matt 5:45). At the same time, God is in no way responsible for our sin; it is our responsibility because it comes from our own sinful desires. Scripture repeatedly demonstrates that people have the ability to choose to follow God or to reject him (see, e.g., Deut 30:15-20; Josh 24:1...","summary_en":"Divine Sovereignty and Human Responsibility The Bible ultimately traces all things back to God’s sovereignty. For example, the fact that the rain falls on the just and unjust alike is part of God’s sovereign plan (Matt 5:45). At the same time, God is in no way responsible for our sin; it is our responsibility because it comes from our own sinful desires. Scripture repeatedly demonstrates that people have the ability to choose to follow God or to reject him (see, e.g., Deut 30:15-20; Josh 24:1...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120760,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Following Jesus","title_en":"Following Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","summary_en":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121130,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John","title_en":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>“Belief” in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun <em>faith<\/em> that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb <em>believe<\/em> to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, the verb translated “believe” is often followed by the Greek preposition <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eis<\/span> (“into”). No parallel exists for this combination in ancient Greek usage. For John, faith is not a status, but an investment in the person of Jesus. Faith means accepting who Jesus is and what he claims to be. Faith constitutes a commitment to let his call change the way we live. Faith is the work God wants from us (John 6:29), demonstrated as we abide in Jesus’ word, as we love him, and as we obey his commands (John 8:31; 15:1-17; see 1 Jn 5:10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; Isa 28:16; Mark 1:15; 9:23-24; John 1:12-13; 3:10-18; 5:24; 6:35-36; 7:38; 9:35-38; 11:25-27; 12:37; 20:25-31; Acts 10:43; 13:39; Rom 1:16; 10:9-10; Heb 4:3<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>“Belief” in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun <em>faith<\/em> that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb <em>believe<\/em> to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, the verb translated “believe” is often followed by the Greek preposition <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eis<\/span> (“into”). No parallel exists for this combination in ancient Greek usage. For John, faith is not a status, but an investment in the person of Jesus. Faith means accepting who Jesus is and what he claims to be. Faith constitutes a commitment to let his call change the way we live. Faith is the work God wants from us (John 6:29), demonstrated as we abide in Jesus’ word, as we love him, and as we obey his commands (John 8:31; 15:1-17; see 1 Jn 5:10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; Isa 28:16; Mark 1:15; 9:23-24; John 1:12-13; 3:10-18; 5:24; 6:35-36; 7:38; 9:35-38; 11:25-27; 12:37; 20:25-31; Acts 10:43; 13:39; Rom 1:16; 10:9-10; Heb 4:3<\/p>","summary_ro":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun faith that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb believe to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples. In the Gospel of ...","summary_en":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun faith that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb believe to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples. In the Gospel of ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121648,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miracles","title_en":"Miracles","content_ro":"<h3>Miracles<\/h3>\n<p>Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in more than the miracle itself (see John 12:37). Miracles remind us of the truth that anything is possible for God (Mark 9:21-23; cp. Matt 19:26; Mark 10:27; Luke 1:37; 18:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus performed many miracles during his ministry including physical healings, exorcisms, nature miracles, and raising the dead. Jesus demonstrated a deep love for humankind in the way he responded to people’s needs, and many people followed him in response to his miracles (John 6:2), though he cautioned against following him just because of the miracles (John 6:26). Perhaps the three greatest miracles that occurred in relation to Jesus are (1) his coming as the Word of God in human flesh (John 1:14), (2) his glorious resurrection from the dead (Matt 28; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-53; John 20:1-31; Acts 1:3; 1 Cor 15:3-8; cp Acts 23:6; 26:8), and (3) the miracle of the new birth (John 3:3-8; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:8-10). The coming of Jesus into the world to be the Savior and to die for our sins shows us how much God loves us (John 3:16; Rom 5:8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5; 1 Jn 3:1-2). The fact that God raised Jesus from the dead reveals God’s power over death and gives us a living hope, the promise of eternal life (1 Pet 1:3-9). And the person who puts faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord is born anew as a child of God and receives eternal life (John 1:12; 3:36; Rom 5:1-2; 1 Jn 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>The miraculous activity of Jesus continued in the work of his followers, as demonstrated throughout the book of Acts (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-15; 6:8; 8:6-7; 9:32-42; 14:3). Filled with the Holy Spirit, the apostles and other Christian leaders performed these miraculous signs, wonders, and mighty works, often in order to offer tangible evidence of the power and truth of the Christian message (14:3; see John 3:2; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 19:23-26; 28:1-20; Mark 10:23-27; Luke 1:30-38; 18:24-27; 24:1-53; John 1:12-14; 3:2-8, 16; 20:1–21:25; Acts 4:29-31; 5:12-16; 6:8; 8:4-23; 9:32-42; 14:3-4; 26:8; Rom 5:1, 8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5, 8-10; Heb 2:4; 1 Pet 1:3-5; 1 Jn 5:12-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miracles<\/h3>\n<p>Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in more than the miracle itself (see John 12:37). Miracles remind us of the truth that anything is possible for God (Mark 9:21-23; cp. Matt 19:26; Mark 10:27; Luke 1:37; 18:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus performed many miracles during his ministry including physical healings, exorcisms, nature miracles, and raising the dead. Jesus demonstrated a deep love for humankind in the way he responded to people’s needs, and many people followed him in response to his miracles (John 6:2), though he cautioned against following him just because of the miracles (John 6:26). Perhaps the three greatest miracles that occurred in relation to Jesus are (1) his coming as the Word of God in human flesh (John 1:14), (2) his glorious resurrection from the dead (Matt 28; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-53; John 20:1-31; Acts 1:3; 1 Cor 15:3-8; cp Acts 23:6; 26:8), and (3) the miracle of the new birth (John 3:3-8; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:8-10). The coming of Jesus into the world to be the Savior and to die for our sins shows us how much God loves us (John 3:16; Rom 5:8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5; 1 Jn 3:1-2). The fact that God raised Jesus from the dead reveals God’s power over death and gives us a living hope, the promise of eternal life (1 Pet 1:3-9). And the person who puts faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord is born anew as a child of God and receives eternal life (John 1:12; 3:36; Rom 5:1-2; 1 Jn 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>The miraculous activity of Jesus continued in the work of his followers, as demonstrated throughout the book of Acts (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-15; 6:8; 8:6-7; 9:32-42; 14:3). Filled with the Holy Spirit, the apostles and other Christian leaders performed these miraculous signs, wonders, and mighty works, often in order to offer tangible evidence of the power and truth of the Christian message (14:3; see John 3:2; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 19:23-26; 28:1-20; Mark 10:23-27; Luke 1:30-38; 18:24-27; 24:1-53; John 1:12-14; 3:2-8, 16; 20:1–21:25; Acts 4:29-31; 5:12-16; 6:8; 8:4-23; 9:32-42; 14:3-4; 26:8; Rom 5:1, 8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5, 8-10; Heb 2:4; 1 Pet 1:3-5; 1 Jn 5:12-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miracles Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in ...","summary_en":"Miracles Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":122924,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Word","title_en":"God’s Word","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Word<\/h3>\n<p>A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the universe and still governs it (Gen 1:3-28; Heb 1:3; 11:3).<\/p>\n<p>In the past, God’s word came primarily through angels or prophets, but now it has come preeminently in the person of Jesus, God’s Son (Heb 1:1-4; 2:3-4; cp. John 1:1-14). The word is to be heard, heeded, obeyed, and believed as a source of hope.<\/p>\n<p>Through his word, God initiates relationship with us and wants us to listen to him and respond in faith (see Gen 15:6; John 1:12). His word is authoritative and intentional, and it gives profound hope because God can be trusted to keep his promises (Heb 6:13-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-28; Deut 8:3; Pss 12:6; 19:8; 119:11, 89, 105; Isa 40:8; Jer 15:16; 23:29; 36:2; Matt 5:18; 7:24; John 1:1-14; 5:24; 2 Tim 3:16; Heb 1:1-4; 4:12; 6:13-20; 11:3; 1 Pet 1:25; 2 Pet 1:19-21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Word<\/h3>\n<p>A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the universe and still governs it (Gen 1:3-28; Heb 1:3; 11:3).<\/p>\n<p>In the past, God’s word came primarily through angels or prophets, but now it has come preeminently in the person of Jesus, God’s Son (Heb 1:1-4; 2:3-4; cp. John 1:1-14). The word is to be heard, heeded, obeyed, and believed as a source of hope.<\/p>\n<p>Through his word, God initiates relationship with us and wants us to listen to him and respond in faith (see Gen 15:6; John 1:12). His word is authoritative and intentional, and it gives profound hope because God can be trusted to keep his promises (Heb 6:13-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-28; Deut 8:3; Pss 12:6; 19:8; 119:11, 89, 105; Isa 40:8; Jer 15:16; 23:29; 36:2; Matt 5:18; 7:24; John 1:1-14; 5:24; 2 Tim 3:16; Heb 1:1-4; 4:12; 6:13-20; 11:3; 1 Pet 1:25; 2 Pet 1:19-21<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Word A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the ...","summary_en":"God’s Word A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147297,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Divine Sovereignty and Human Responsibility","title_en":"Divine Sovereignty and Human Responsibility","content_ro":"<h3>Divine Sovereignty and Human Responsibility<\/h3>\n<p>The Bible ultimately traces all things back to God’s sovereignty. For example, the fact that the rain falls on the just and unjust alike is part of God’s sovereign plan (Matt 5:45).<\/p>\n<p>At the same time, God is in no way responsible for our sin; it is our responsibility because it comes from our own sinful desires. Scripture repeatedly demonstrates that people have the ability to choose to follow God or to reject him (see, e.g., Deut 30:15-20; Josh 24:15; John 1:12; Rom 10:9-13). God does not coerce people to have faith in him.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel 14:9-11 describes an intriguing situation in which God deceives a prophet but then also holds that same prophet accountable for his actions. This leads to a difficult question: How can we reconcile God’s sovereign control over all things with the personal choices and decisions for which we will be called to account?<\/p>\n<p>In giving misleading messages to false prophets, God was simply giving them and their hearers exactly what they wanted (cp. 2 Thes 2:11). Even a false prophet could give a prophecy that led people astray only with the Lord’s permission or direction. Unless God restrained them from their sin, they would choose lies instead of the truth and worship creation in place of the Creator (Rom 1:18-25). God simply gave them permission to enact their hearts’ sinful desires.<\/p>\n<p>The remarkable fact is not that God allows some sinners to persist in their chosen delusions, but that he saves sinners, changes our natures, and gives us the desire to do good for his glory (see Ezek 36:25-26; Rom 8:1-11; Eph 2:10). While we may not be able to completely reconcile this complex tension, we can be assured of the freely offered grace of God and the new life that he gives through his Spirit to all who trust in him.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 2:6-7; 1 Kgs 22:19-22; 2 Chr 20:6; Job 1:8-12; 2:2-6; Pss 115:3; 135:6-14; Isa 45:6-7; Lam 3:37-40; Ezek 14:9-11; 17:24; 36:25-26; Dan 2:20-22; Amos 3:6; 4:6-11; Rom 1:18-25; 9:8-33; 12:2; Eph 4:20-24; 2 Thes 2:11-12; Heb 13:20-21; Jas 1:13-14; 4:12-16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Divine Sovereignty and Human Responsibility<\/h3>\n<p>The Bible ultimately traces all things back to God’s sovereignty. For example, the fact that the rain falls on the just and unjust alike is part of God’s sovereign plan (Matt 5:45).<\/p>\n<p>At the same time, God is in no way responsible for our sin; it is our responsibility because it comes from our own sinful desires. Scripture repeatedly demonstrates that people have the ability to choose to follow God or to reject him (see, e.g., Deut 30:15-20; Josh 24:15; John 1:12; Rom 10:9-13). God does not coerce people to have faith in him.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel 14:9-11 describes an intriguing situation in which God deceives a prophet but then also holds that same prophet accountable for his actions. This leads to a difficult question: How can we reconcile God’s sovereign control over all things with the personal choices and decisions for which we will be called to account?<\/p>\n<p>In giving misleading messages to false prophets, God was simply giving them and their hearers exactly what they wanted (cp. 2 Thes 2:11). Even a false prophet could give a prophecy that led people astray only with the Lord’s permission or direction. Unless God restrained them from their sin, they would choose lies instead of the truth and worship creation in place of the Creator (Rom 1:18-25). God simply gave them permission to enact their hearts’ sinful desires.<\/p>\n<p>The remarkable fact is not that God allows some sinners to persist in their chosen delusions, but that he saves sinners, changes our natures, and gives us the desire to do good for his glory (see Ezek 36:25-26; Rom 8:1-11; Eph 2:10). While we may not be able to completely reconcile this complex tension, we can be assured of the freely offered grace of God and the new life that he gives through his Spirit to all who trust in him.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 2:6-7; 1 Kgs 22:19-22; 2 Chr 20:6; Job 1:8-12; 2:2-6; Pss 115:3; 135:6-14; Isa 45:6-7; Lam 3:37-40; Ezek 14:9-11; 17:24; 36:25-26; Dan 2:20-22; Amos 3:6; 4:6-11; Rom 1:18-25; 9:8-33; 12:2; Eph 4:20-24; 2 Thes 2:11-12; Heb 13:20-21; Jas 1:13-14; 4:12-16<\/p>","summary_ro":"Divine Sovereignty and Human Responsibility The Bible ultimately traces all things back to God’s sovereignty. For example, the fact that the rain falls on the just and unjust alike is part of God’s sovereign plan (Matt 5:45). At the same time, God is in no way responsible for our sin; it is our responsibility because it comes from our own sinful desires. Scripture repeatedly demonstrates that people have the ability to choose to follow God or to reject him (see, e.g., Deut 30:15-20; Josh 24:1...","summary_en":"Divine Sovereignty and Human Responsibility The Bible ultimately traces all things back to God’s sovereignty. For example, the fact that the rain falls on the just and unjust alike is part of God’s sovereign plan (Matt 5:45). At the same time, God is in no way responsible for our sin; it is our responsibility because it comes from our own sinful desires. Scripture repeatedly demonstrates that people have the ability to choose to follow God or to reject him (see, e.g., Deut 30:15-20; Josh 24:1...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148386,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Following Jesus","title_en":"Following Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","summary_en":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148756,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John","title_en":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>“Belief” in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun <em>faith<\/em> that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb <em>believe<\/em> to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, the verb translated “believe” is often followed by the Greek preposition <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eis<\/span> (“into”). No parallel exists for this combination in ancient Greek usage. For John, faith is not a status, but an investment in the person of Jesus. Faith means accepting who Jesus is and what he claims to be. Faith constitutes a commitment to let his call change the way we live. Faith is the work God wants from us (John 6:29), demonstrated as we abide in Jesus’ word, as we love him, and as we obey his commands (John 8:31; 15:1-17; see 1 Jn 5:10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; Isa 28:16; Mark 1:15; 9:23-24; John 1:12-13; 3:10-18; 5:24; 6:35-36; 7:38; 9:35-38; 11:25-27; 12:37; 20:25-31; Acts 10:43; 13:39; Rom 1:16; 10:9-10; Heb 4:3<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>“Belief” in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun <em>faith<\/em> that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb <em>believe<\/em> to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, the verb translated “believe” is often followed by the Greek preposition <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eis<\/span> (“into”). No parallel exists for this combination in ancient Greek usage. For John, faith is not a status, but an investment in the person of Jesus. Faith means accepting who Jesus is and what he claims to be. Faith constitutes a commitment to let his call change the way we live. Faith is the work God wants from us (John 6:29), demonstrated as we abide in Jesus’ word, as we love him, and as we obey his commands (John 8:31; 15:1-17; see 1 Jn 5:10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; Isa 28:16; Mark 1:15; 9:23-24; John 1:12-13; 3:10-18; 5:24; 6:35-36; 7:38; 9:35-38; 11:25-27; 12:37; 20:25-31; Acts 10:43; 13:39; Rom 1:16; 10:9-10; Heb 4:3<\/p>","summary_ro":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun faith that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb believe to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples. In the Gospel of ...","summary_en":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun faith that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb believe to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples. In the Gospel of ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":149274,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miracles","title_en":"Miracles","content_ro":"<h3>Miracles<\/h3>\n<p>Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in more than the miracle itself (see John 12:37). Miracles remind us of the truth that anything is possible for God (Mark 9:21-23; cp. Matt 19:26; Mark 10:27; Luke 1:37; 18:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus performed many miracles during his ministry including physical healings, exorcisms, nature miracles, and raising the dead. Jesus demonstrated a deep love for humankind in the way he responded to people’s needs, and many people followed him in response to his miracles (John 6:2), though he cautioned against following him just because of the miracles (John 6:26). Perhaps the three greatest miracles that occurred in relation to Jesus are (1) his coming as the Word of God in human flesh (John 1:14), (2) his glorious resurrection from the dead (Matt 28; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-53; John 20:1-31; Acts 1:3; 1 Cor 15:3-8; cp Acts 23:6; 26:8), and (3) the miracle of the new birth (John 3:3-8; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:8-10). The coming of Jesus into the world to be the Savior and to die for our sins shows us how much God loves us (John 3:16; Rom 5:8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5; 1 Jn 3:1-2). The fact that God raised Jesus from the dead reveals God’s power over death and gives us a living hope, the promise of eternal life (1 Pet 1:3-9). And the person who puts faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord is born anew as a child of God and receives eternal life (John 1:12; 3:36; Rom 5:1-2; 1 Jn 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>The miraculous activity of Jesus continued in the work of his followers, as demonstrated throughout the book of Acts (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-15; 6:8; 8:6-7; 9:32-42; 14:3). Filled with the Holy Spirit, the apostles and other Christian leaders performed these miraculous signs, wonders, and mighty works, often in order to offer tangible evidence of the power and truth of the Christian message (14:3; see John 3:2; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 19:23-26; 28:1-20; Mark 10:23-27; Luke 1:30-38; 18:24-27; 24:1-53; John 1:12-14; 3:2-8, 16; 20:1–21:25; Acts 4:29-31; 5:12-16; 6:8; 8:4-23; 9:32-42; 14:3-4; 26:8; Rom 5:1, 8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5, 8-10; Heb 2:4; 1 Pet 1:3-5; 1 Jn 5:12-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miracles<\/h3>\n<p>Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in more than the miracle itself (see John 12:37). Miracles remind us of the truth that anything is possible for God (Mark 9:21-23; cp. Matt 19:26; Mark 10:27; Luke 1:37; 18:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus performed many miracles during his ministry including physical healings, exorcisms, nature miracles, and raising the dead. Jesus demonstrated a deep love for humankind in the way he responded to people’s needs, and many people followed him in response to his miracles (John 6:2), though he cautioned against following him just because of the miracles (John 6:26). Perhaps the three greatest miracles that occurred in relation to Jesus are (1) his coming as the Word of God in human flesh (John 1:14), (2) his glorious resurrection from the dead (Matt 28; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-53; John 20:1-31; Acts 1:3; 1 Cor 15:3-8; cp Acts 23:6; 26:8), and (3) the miracle of the new birth (John 3:3-8; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:8-10). The coming of Jesus into the world to be the Savior and to die for our sins shows us how much God loves us (John 3:16; Rom 5:8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5; 1 Jn 3:1-2). The fact that God raised Jesus from the dead reveals God’s power over death and gives us a living hope, the promise of eternal life (1 Pet 1:3-9). And the person who puts faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord is born anew as a child of God and receives eternal life (John 1:12; 3:36; Rom 5:1-2; 1 Jn 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>The miraculous activity of Jesus continued in the work of his followers, as demonstrated throughout the book of Acts (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-15; 6:8; 8:6-7; 9:32-42; 14:3). Filled with the Holy Spirit, the apostles and other Christian leaders performed these miraculous signs, wonders, and mighty works, often in order to offer tangible evidence of the power and truth of the Christian message (14:3; see John 3:2; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 19:23-26; 28:1-20; Mark 10:23-27; Luke 1:30-38; 18:24-27; 24:1-53; John 1:12-14; 3:2-8, 16; 20:1–21:25; Acts 4:29-31; 5:12-16; 6:8; 8:4-23; 9:32-42; 14:3-4; 26:8; Rom 5:1, 8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5, 8-10; Heb 2:4; 1 Pet 1:3-5; 1 Jn 5:12-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miracles Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in ...","summary_en":"Miracles Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":150550,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Word","title_en":"God’s Word","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Word<\/h3>\n<p>A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the universe and still governs it (Gen 1:3-28; Heb 1:3; 11:3).<\/p>\n<p>In the past, God’s word came primarily through angels or prophets, but now it has come preeminently in the person of Jesus, God’s Son (Heb 1:1-4; 2:3-4; cp. John 1:1-14). The word is to be heard, heeded, obeyed, and believed as a source of hope.<\/p>\n<p>Through his word, God initiates relationship with us and wants us to listen to him and respond in faith (see Gen 15:6; John 1:12). His word is authoritative and intentional, and it gives profound hope because God can be trusted to keep his promises (Heb 6:13-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-28; Deut 8:3; Pss 12:6; 19:8; 119:11, 89, 105; Isa 40:8; Jer 15:16; 23:29; 36:2; Matt 5:18; 7:24; John 1:1-14; 5:24; 2 Tim 3:16; Heb 1:1-4; 4:12; 6:13-20; 11:3; 1 Pet 1:25; 2 Pet 1:19-21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Word<\/h3>\n<p>A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the universe and still governs it (Gen 1:3-28; Heb 1:3; 11:3).<\/p>\n<p>In the past, God’s word came primarily through angels or prophets, but now it has come preeminently in the person of Jesus, God’s Son (Heb 1:1-4; 2:3-4; cp. John 1:1-14). The word is to be heard, heeded, obeyed, and believed as a source of hope.<\/p>\n<p>Through his word, God initiates relationship with us and wants us to listen to him and respond in faith (see Gen 15:6; John 1:12). His word is authoritative and intentional, and it gives profound hope because God can be trusted to keep his promises (Heb 6:13-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-28; Deut 8:3; Pss 12:6; 19:8; 119:11, 89, 105; Isa 40:8; Jer 15:16; 23:29; 36:2; Matt 5:18; 7:24; John 1:1-14; 5:24; 2 Tim 3:16; Heb 1:1-4; 4:12; 6:13-20; 11:3; 1 Pet 1:25; 2 Pet 1:19-21<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Word A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the ...","summary_en":"God’s Word A foundational truth of Scripture is that God has spoken. The author of Hebrews, in line with other Jewish preachers of the era, presents the Old Testament as coming from the mouth of God, introducing those texts with “God says . . .” or something similar. God may speak a word of promise (Heb 6:13-14) or a word of punishment (3:11; 4:11-12); he may tell us something about himself or his Son (see 1:5-12) or reveal some aspect of his will (see 8:7-13; 10:5-7). God’s word created the ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"13":[{"id":56315,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:13","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:13","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:13<\/strong> <em>a birth that comes from God:<\/em> People can escape the darkness only by God’s grace (8:12; 12:35-36, 44-46).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:13<\/strong> <em>a birth that comes from God:<\/em> People can escape the darkness only by God’s grace (8:12; 12:35-36, 44-46).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:13 a birth that comes from God: People can escape the darkness only by God’s grace (8:12; 12:35-36, 44-46).","summary_en":"1:13 a birth that comes from God: People can escape the darkness only by God’s grace (8:12; 12:35-36, 44-46).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83941,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:13","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:13","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:13<\/strong> <em>a birth that comes from God:<\/em> People can escape the darkness only by God’s grace (8:12; 12:35-36, 44-46).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:13<\/strong> <em>a birth that comes from God:<\/em> People can escape the darkness only by God’s grace (8:12; 12:35-36, 44-46).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:13 a birth that comes from God: People can escape the darkness only by God’s grace (8:12; 12:35-36, 44-46).","summary_en":"1:13 a birth that comes from God: People can escape the darkness only by God’s grace (8:12; 12:35-36, 44-46).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111567,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:13","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:13","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:13<\/strong> <em>a birth that comes from God:<\/em> People can escape the darkness only by God’s grace (8:12; 12:35-36, 44-46).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:13<\/strong> <em>a birth that comes from God:<\/em> People can escape the darkness only by God’s grace (8:12; 12:35-36, 44-46).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:13 a birth that comes from God: People can escape the darkness only by God’s grace (8:12; 12:35-36, 44-46).","summary_en":"1:13 a birth that comes from God: People can escape the darkness only by God’s grace (8:12; 12:35-36, 44-46).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139193,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:13","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:13","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:13<\/strong> <em>a birth that comes from God:<\/em> People can escape the darkness only by God’s grace (8:12; 12:35-36, 44-46).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:13<\/strong> <em>a birth that comes from God:<\/em> People can escape the darkness only by God’s grace (8:12; 12:35-36, 44-46).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:13 a birth that comes from God: People can escape the darkness only by God’s grace (8:12; 12:35-36, 44-46).","summary_en":"1:13 a birth that comes from God: People can escape the darkness only by God’s grace (8:12; 12:35-36, 44-46).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"14":[{"id":4686,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of the Bible*, Inspiration","title_en":"of the Bible*, Inspiration","content_ro":"<h3>BIBLE*, I<span>nspiration of the<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Theological term for the influence God exerted on the writers of Scripture, enabling them to transmit his revelations in writing.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible itself tells us that it is an inspired text. It says, “All scripture is given by inspiration of God” (2 Tm 3:16, <span>kjv<\/span>). A translation closer to the original language (Greek) would be, “All Scripture is God-breathed” (<span>niv<\/span>). This tells us that every word of the Bible was breathed out from God. The words of the Bible came from God and were written by men. The apostle Peter affirmed this when he said that “no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation. For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit” (2 Pt 1:20-21, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>“Men spoke from God.” This short sentence is the key to understanding how the Bible came into being. Thousands of years ago, God chose certain men—such as Moses, David, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel—to receive his words and write them down. What they wrote became books, or sections, of the OT. Nearly 2,000 years ago, God chose other men—such as Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and Paul—to communicate his new message, the message of salvation through Jesus Christ. What they wrote became books, or sections, of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>God gave his words to these men in many different ways. Certain writers of the OT received messages directly from God. Moses was given the Ten Commandments inscribed on a stone when he was in God’s presence on Mt Sinai. When David was composing his psalms to God, he received divine inspiration to foretell certain events that would occur 1,000 years later in Jesus Christ’s life. God told his prophets—such as Isaiah and Jeremiah—exactly what to say; therefore, when they gave a message, it was God’s word, not their own. This is why many OT prophets often said, “Thus says the Lord.” (This statement appears over 2,000 times in the OT.) To other prophets, such as Ezekiel and Daniel, God communicated his message through visions and dreams. They recorded exactly what they saw, whether they understood it or not. And other OT writers, such as Samuel and Ezra, were directed by God to record events in the history of Israel.<\/p>\n\n<p>Four hundred years after the last book of the OT (Malachi) was written, God’s Son, Jesus Christ, came to earth. In his talks, he affirmed the divine authorship of the OT writings (see Mt 5:17-19; Lk 16:17; Jn 10:35). Furthermore, he often pointed to certain passages in the OT as having predicted certain events in his life (see Lk 24:27, 44). The NT writers also affirmed the divine inspiration of the OT text. It was the apostle Paul who was directed by God to write, “All Scripture is God-inspired.” Quite specifically, he was speaking of the OT. And, as was already noted, Peter said that the OT prophets were motivated by the Holy Spirit to speak from God.<\/p>\n<p>The NT is also a God-inspired book. Before Jesus left this earth and returned to his Father, he told the disciples that he would send the Holy Spirit to them. He told them that one of the functions of the Holy Spirit would be to remind them of all the things that Jesus had said and then to guide them into more truth (see Jn 14:26; 15:26; 16:13-15). Those who wrote the Gospels were helped by the Holy Spirit to remember Jesus’ exact words, and those who wrote other parts of the NT were guided by the Spirit as they wrote.<\/p>\n<p>The inspiration for writing the Gospels didn’t begin when the authors set pen to papyrus; the inspiration began when the disciples Matthew, Peter (for whom Mark wrote), and John were enlightened by their encounters with Jesus Christ, the Son of God. The apostles’ experiences with him altered their lives forever, imprinting on their souls unforgettable images of the revealed God-man, Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>This is what John was speaking of in the prologue to his Gospel when he declared, “The Word became flesh and lived among us, and we have seen his glory” (1:14, paraphrased). The “we” refers to those eyewitnesses of Jesus’ glory—the apostles who lived with Jesus for over three years. This reminiscence is expanded upon in John’s prologue to his first epistle, where he says “we have heard him, touched him, seen him, and looked upon him” (1 Jn 1:1-2, paraphrased). In both the Gospel and the Epistle, the verbs are in the perfect tense, denoting a past action with a present, abiding effect. Those past encounters with Jesus were never forgotten by John; they lived with him and stayed with him as an inspiring spirit until the day—many years later—he wrote of them in his Gospel. The same could be said for Matthew, who wrote an important Gospel, and Peter, who was really the author behind Mark’s composition. Luke was not an eyewitness, but he based his Gospel on the accounts of those who were (see Lk 1:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>The inspiration for the writing of the Epistles can also be traced to the writers’ encounters with the living Christ. The most prominent epistle writer, Paul, repeatedly claims that his inspiration and subsequent commission came from his encounter with the risen Christ (see, for example, 1 Cor 15:8-10). Peter also claims that his writings were based upon his experiences with the living Christ (see 1 Pt 5:1; 2 Pt 1:16-18). And so does John, who claims to have experienced the God-man visibly, audibly, and palpably (see 1 Jn 1:1-4). James and Jude make no such claim directly, but since they were the brothers of Jesus who became converts when they saw the risen Christ (this is certain for James—see 1 Cor 15:7—and presumed for Jude—see Acts 1:14), they too drew their inspiration from their encounters with the living Christ. Thus, all the epistle writers (with the possible exception of the one who wrote Hebrews, who is unknown) knew the living Christ. This is the relationship that qualified them to write those books that became part of the NT canon. This made them distinct from all others, no matter how good their writings were.<\/p>\n<p>The writers of the NT epistles were inspired by the Spirit when they wrote. Speaking for all the apostles, Paul indicated that the NT apostles were taught by the Holy Spirit what to say. The writers of the NT did not speak with words “taught by human wisdom,” but with “words taught by the Holy Spirit” (see 1 Cor 2:10-13). What they wrote was Spirit-taught. For example, when the apostle John saw that Jesus Christ had come to give eternal life to men, the Spirit helped him express this truth in many different ways. Thus, the reader of John’s Gospel sees different phrases about Jesus giving life: “in him was life,” “a well of living water springing up into eternal life,” “the bread of life,” “the light of life,” “the resurrection and the life,” etc. (see Jn 1:4; 4:14; 6:48; 8:12; 11:25; 14:6). When the apostle Paul contemplated the fullness of Christ’s deity, he was inspired by the Spirit to use such phrasing as “in him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily,” “in him are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge,” and “the unsearchable riches of Christ” (see Col 2:3, 9; Eph 3:8).<\/p>\n<p>As the Spirit taught the writers, they used their own vocabulary and writing style to express the thought of the Spirit. As such, the Scriptures came as the result of divine and human cooperation. The Scriptures were not mechanically inspired—as if God used the men as machines through whom he dictated the divine utterance. Rather, the Scriptures were inspired by God, then written by men. The Bible, therefore, is both fully divine and fully human.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BIBLE*, I<span>nspiration of the<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Theological term for the influence God exerted on the writers of Scripture, enabling them to transmit his revelations in writing.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible itself tells us that it is an inspired text. It says, “All scripture is given by inspiration of God” (2 Tm 3:16, <span>kjv<\/span>). A translation closer to the original language (Greek) would be, “All Scripture is God-breathed” (<span>niv<\/span>). This tells us that every word of the Bible was breathed out from God. The words of the Bible came from God and were written by men. The apostle Peter affirmed this when he said that “no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation. For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit” (2 Pt 1:20-21, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>“Men spoke from God.” This short sentence is the key to understanding how the Bible came into being. Thousands of years ago, God chose certain men—such as Moses, David, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel—to receive his words and write them down. What they wrote became books, or sections, of the OT. Nearly 2,000 years ago, God chose other men—such as Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and Paul—to communicate his new message, the message of salvation through Jesus Christ. What they wrote became books, or sections, of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>God gave his words to these men in many different ways. Certain writers of the OT received messages directly from God. Moses was given the Ten Commandments inscribed on a stone when he was in God’s presence on Mt Sinai. When David was composing his psalms to God, he received divine inspiration to foretell certain events that would occur 1,000 years later in Jesus Christ’s life. God told his prophets—such as Isaiah and Jeremiah—exactly what to say; therefore, when they gave a message, it was God’s word, not their own. This is why many OT prophets often said, “Thus says the Lord.” (This statement appears over 2,000 times in the OT.) To other prophets, such as Ezekiel and Daniel, God communicated his message through visions and dreams. They recorded exactly what they saw, whether they understood it or not. And other OT writers, such as Samuel and Ezra, were directed by God to record events in the history of Israel.<\/p>\n\n<p>Four hundred years after the last book of the OT (Malachi) was written, God’s Son, Jesus Christ, came to earth. In his talks, he affirmed the divine authorship of the OT writings (see Mt 5:17-19; Lk 16:17; Jn 10:35). Furthermore, he often pointed to certain passages in the OT as having predicted certain events in his life (see Lk 24:27, 44). The NT writers also affirmed the divine inspiration of the OT text. It was the apostle Paul who was directed by God to write, “All Scripture is God-inspired.” Quite specifically, he was speaking of the OT. And, as was already noted, Peter said that the OT prophets were motivated by the Holy Spirit to speak from God.<\/p>\n<p>The NT is also a God-inspired book. Before Jesus left this earth and returned to his Father, he told the disciples that he would send the Holy Spirit to them. He told them that one of the functions of the Holy Spirit would be to remind them of all the things that Jesus had said and then to guide them into more truth (see Jn 14:26; 15:26; 16:13-15). Those who wrote the Gospels were helped by the Holy Spirit to remember Jesus’ exact words, and those who wrote other parts of the NT were guided by the Spirit as they wrote.<\/p>\n<p>The inspiration for writing the Gospels didn’t begin when the authors set pen to papyrus; the inspiration began when the disciples Matthew, Peter (for whom Mark wrote), and John were enlightened by their encounters with Jesus Christ, the Son of God. The apostles’ experiences with him altered their lives forever, imprinting on their souls unforgettable images of the revealed God-man, Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>This is what John was speaking of in the prologue to his Gospel when he declared, “The Word became flesh and lived among us, and we have seen his glory” (1:14, paraphrased). The “we” refers to those eyewitnesses of Jesus’ glory—the apostles who lived with Jesus for over three years. This reminiscence is expanded upon in John’s prologue to his first epistle, where he says “we have heard him, touched him, seen him, and looked upon him” (1 Jn 1:1-2, paraphrased). In both the Gospel and the Epistle, the verbs are in the perfect tense, denoting a past action with a present, abiding effect. Those past encounters with Jesus were never forgotten by John; they lived with him and stayed with him as an inspiring spirit until the day—many years later—he wrote of them in his Gospel. The same could be said for Matthew, who wrote an important Gospel, and Peter, who was really the author behind Mark’s composition. Luke was not an eyewitness, but he based his Gospel on the accounts of those who were (see Lk 1:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>The inspiration for the writing of the Epistles can also be traced to the writers’ encounters with the living Christ. The most prominent epistle writer, Paul, repeatedly claims that his inspiration and subsequent commission came from his encounter with the risen Christ (see, for example, 1 Cor 15:8-10). Peter also claims that his writings were based upon his experiences with the living Christ (see 1 Pt 5:1; 2 Pt 1:16-18). And so does John, who claims to have experienced the God-man visibly, audibly, and palpably (see 1 Jn 1:1-4). James and Jude make no such claim directly, but since they were the brothers of Jesus who became converts when they saw the risen Christ (this is certain for James—see 1 Cor 15:7—and presumed for Jude—see Acts 1:14), they too drew their inspiration from their encounters with the living Christ. Thus, all the epistle writers (with the possible exception of the one who wrote Hebrews, who is unknown) knew the living Christ. This is the relationship that qualified them to write those books that became part of the NT canon. This made them distinct from all others, no matter how good their writings were.<\/p>\n<p>The writers of the NT epistles were inspired by the Spirit when they wrote. Speaking for all the apostles, Paul indicated that the NT apostles were taught by the Holy Spirit what to say. The writers of the NT did not speak with words “taught by human wisdom,” but with “words taught by the Holy Spirit” (see 1 Cor 2:10-13). What they wrote was Spirit-taught. For example, when the apostle John saw that Jesus Christ had come to give eternal life to men, the Spirit helped him express this truth in many different ways. Thus, the reader of John’s Gospel sees different phrases about Jesus giving life: “in him was life,” “a well of living water springing up into eternal life,” “the bread of life,” “the light of life,” “the resurrection and the life,” etc. (see Jn 1:4; 4:14; 6:48; 8:12; 11:25; 14:6). When the apostle Paul contemplated the fullness of Christ’s deity, he was inspired by the Spirit to use such phrasing as “in him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily,” “in him are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge,” and “the unsearchable riches of Christ” (see Col 2:3, 9; Eph 3:8).<\/p>\n<p>As the Spirit taught the writers, they used their own vocabulary and writing style to express the thought of the Spirit. As such, the Scriptures came as the result of divine and human cooperation. The Scriptures were not mechanically inspired—as if God used the men as machines through whom he dictated the divine utterance. Rather, the Scriptures were inspired by God, then written by men. The Bible, therefore, is both fully divine and fully human.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BIBLE*, Inspiration of the Theological term for the influence God exerted on the writers of Scripture, enabling them to transmit his revelations in writing. The Bible itself tells us that it is an inspired text. It says, “All scripture is given by inspiration of God” (2 Tm 3:16, kjv). A translation closer to the original language (Greek) would be, “All Scripture is God-breathed” (niv). This tells us that every word of the Bible was breathed out from God. The words of the Bible came from God a...","summary_en":"BIBLE*, Inspiration of the Theological term for the influence God exerted on the writers of Scripture, enabling them to transmit his revelations in writing. The Bible itself tells us that it is an inspired text. It says, “All scripture is given by inspiration of God” (2 Tm 3:16, kjv). A translation closer to the original language (Greek) would be, “All Scripture is God-breathed” (niv). This tells us that every word of the Bible was breathed out from God. The words of the Bible came from God a...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":4795,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of the Old Testament in the New Testament Bible*, Quotations","title_en":"of the Old Testament in the New Testament Bible*, Quotations","content_ro":"<h3>BIBLE*, Q<span>uotations of the Old Testament in the New Testament<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>OT passages cited or alluded to in the NT writings.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most complex problems in interpreting the Bible is in understanding how NT writers quoted the OT. Obviously nothing is so formative and authoritative for the NT writers as Scripture. However, the way that they used OT passages often seems strange to modern readers.<\/p>\n<p>The OT has provided the words and ideas for much of the NT. Unless one has a Bible that prints OT quotations in distinctive print, this may not be easily seen, for the NT writers often weave the OT words into their own without indicating they are borrowing from the OT. There are over 400 passages of the OT that are explicitly cited in the NT. Almost half of these are introduced by a statement like “Scripture says” to draw attention to the fact that the authority and thought of the OT is being implemented. For the others, however, the OT words are woven into the fabric of the author’s own statement.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the over 400 passages cited explicitly, there are well over 1,000 places where there is an allusion to an OT text, event, or person. The difference between a quotation and an allusion is sometimes debated for particular texts, but usually the distinction is that in a quotation the author consciously uses the words of an OT passage, whereas with an allusion he has the texts in mind but is not consciously trying to use the words.<\/p>\n<p>Quotations are easy to identify if there is an introductory formula such as “the Scripture says” (as in Rom 10:11; cf. Is 28:16). Where there is no introductory formula, it is easy to overlook explicit quotations (Rom 10:13; cf. Jl 2:32). The allusions are, of course, harder still to recognize, but they often provide the key to interpretation. For example, John 1:14-18—with its mention of glory, grace and truth, Moses, and the fact that no one has seen God—is much more easily and profoundly understood when read in connection with Exodus 33:17–34:8. In the Exodus passage the glory of God and his grace and truth are revealed to Moses. The author was showing that a much more complete revelation of God was given in Jesus than was given Moses in the account recorded in Exodus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition, significant light is shed on many NT passages from OT passages with similar ideas and words even where the NT author may not have been consciously alluding to those texts (e.g. Mt 16:19; Is 22:22). What was behind the author’s thinking is not certain, but in such cases the NT reflects the thinking, the culture, and language of the OT period.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DistributionofOldTestamentQuotations\">Distribution of Old Testament Quotations<\/p>\n<p>The books of the NT that show the most dependence on the OT are Matthew, John, Romans, Hebrews, 1 Peter, and Revelation. Such a statement can be misleading, however, because the writers have different methods.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew quotes or consciously reflects the wording of OT passages about 62 times, almost half of which have an introductory formula. The book of Revelation, on the other hand, never quotes the OT and never has an introductory formula but is probably more dependent on the OT than any other NT book. The book of Hebrews quotes or consciously reflects the OT about 59 times, again half of which have an introductory formula, but the Gospel of John does so only 18 times, nearly always with an introductory formula. However, the allusions to the OT are present on virtually every page of John’s Gospel, so much so that some scholars have argued that he has modeled his account on the exodus narrative, the Jewish feasts, or OT persons and images. Paul’s Letter to the Romans uses the OT 54 times (about three-fourths of which have introductory formulas), but nowhere else so frequently (e.g., 1 Cor 16 times, Gal 11 times, Phil one time, 1 Thes one time).<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the indication that Philippians and 1 Thessalonians use the OT only once each, some other books make explicit use of the OT rarely or never. Colossians, Titus, Philemon, and the Johannine letters do not use the OT at all; 2 Timothy and Jude use the OT only once; while 2 Peter and 1 Timothy make use of it twice.<\/p>\n<p>The important point is to realize that the OT is used most frequently in circumstances where the audience is familiar with the OT or where the OT is essential for describing the events relating to Christ and the church. The books using the OT most frequently (Mt, Jn, Rom, Heb, 1 Pt, Rv) either stem from or are addressed to a Jewish context or, as in the case of Romans and John, deal specifically with the relation of Jews and Christians. The Gospels make rather extensive use of the OT because the language of the OT is necessary to convey the identity and importance of Jesus in the purposes of God. Similarly 1 Peter uses the OT frequently because the author is trying to convey to his persecuted audience that they are the people of God and the inheritors of the promises of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DifficultiesinInterpretation\">Difficulties in Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>Often when people think of quotations of the OT in the NT they think only in terms of prophecy. Some have been guilty of counting up the OT statements that the NT applies to Christ and the church and then claiming these OT texts as predictions that prove Jesus is the Messiah. Such a procedure is filled with problems because it is too simplistic and does not do justice to either the OT or to the way the NT uses it. Of course, the early church used the OT to show that Jesus fulfilled the promises of God and did God’s work, but the use the church made of the OT was quite varied and much of it cannot be classified as predictive prophecy. Prophecy itself is too complex to be limited to predictive thinking.<\/p>\n<p>Some of the most obvious examples of the difficulties appear in Matthew’s Gospel, although they are by no means confined there. Matthew 2:15—“Out of Egypt I called my son”—is a quotation of Hosea 11:1, but in Hosea these words do not refer to the Messiah. They refer to the nation of Israel. Similarly Matthew 2:18 quotes Jeremiah 31:15 (“A voice is heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more,” <span>niv<\/span>) as fulfilled in the slaughter of the innocent babies in Bethlehem, but in Jeremiah the weeping is over the destruction of Jerusalem. John 12:40 views Isaiah 6:10 as fulfilled in Jesus’ ministry, but this verse deals with the call of Isaiah and is not a prediction concerning the ministry of the Messiah. The examples could be multiplied but these should be sufficient to illustrate the problem. For this reason the NT writers have often been accused of twisting the Scriptures, but this charge is as simplistic as the thought that all prophecy is predictive and in fact springs from the same error. Therefore, any attempt to understand the use of the OT in the NT will have to deal with the variety of ways in which the OT is used and with the methods employed by the NT writers.<\/p>\n<p>There are other difficulties that are encountered as well. Sometimes the NT writer will indicate that some fact related to Christ is a fulfillment of the OT but the explicit text that he had in mind cannot be identified. For example, John 7:38 introduces the words “Out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water” with the statement “as Scripture has said.” No OT text reads this way. Possibly the allusion is to the rock that provided water in the wilderness (Ex 17:1), or to the waters that flowed from the new temple (Zec 14:8) or, more generally, it may be a reference to Isaiah 58:11. Similarly, the difficulty in determining the OT text behind the prophecy that Christ will be called a Nazarene (Mt 2:23) is notorious. Probably the reference is to Isaiah 11:1 and the Hebrew word there translated as “branch,” but the connection is not easily made and is not certain. A third example of this kind of difficulty is in 1 Corinthians 14:34, where Paul indicates that women should be in submission just as the Law says, but there is no OT text expressing this idea. His statement in probably to be understood as a summary rather than a quotation or allusion. Similarly on a few occasions an OT text is seemingly attributed to the wrong OT book. In Mark 1:2-3 an OT quotation is attributed to Isaiah but the quotation is really a conflation (or mixing) of Exodus 23:20, Malachi 3:1, and Isaiah 40:3. Matthew 27:9-10 quotes a passage that is said to be from Jeremiah, when really it is dependent on Zechariah 11:13 and might best be described as a summary of Zechariah 11:12-13, with certain words included from Jeremiah 32:6-9. These two examples do not create a major problem, however, for the determination of the origin of the words may be due to their use in collections of quotations from various prophets, in which case the more prominent prophets would be used to designate origin.<\/p>\n<p>The wording of the quotations of the OT text does not always conform to the modern form of the OT. Just as today there are numerous translations of the Bible, when the NT was being written there were various forms of the OT text. With regard to the Hebrew text (for the OT was written mostly in Hebrew), there were different traditions. Such differences in the Hebrew traditions would have been relatively small. Because of the increasing importance of Aramaic after the Babylonian captivity and of Greek after the conquests of Alexander the Great, the OT was also known and used in both these languages when the NT was being written. In fact, the Jews found it necessary in their synagogue services after reading the Hebrew OT to paraphrase the reading in Aramaic so that all could understand. These paraphrases were later written down and are known as Targums. The Greek translation of the OT that stems from the third century <span>BC<\/span> is known as the Septuagint, but there were also other Greek translations in use. This being the case, the wording of a NT quotation is not identical in every detail to the text of the Hebrew OT.<\/p>\n<p>Added to the fact that there were various forms of the text known in first-century <span>AD<\/span> Palestine is the complicating factor that NT writers often did not intend to quote the OT exactly. The use of formal quotation marks is a modern device, and ancient writers were not so taken by technical precision. They were more concerned with the intention of a text and consequently might copy or quote it verbatim, quote it from memory, use or adapt part of a verse, or even change certain words as they borrowed the verse to express their points. (The NT writers often use the OT words describing God’s actions in the past to explain what he has done in their time.) The importance of any differences between the NT quotation and the OT depends on the use to which the quotation is put and the degree to which the use is dependent on textual differences.<\/p>\n<p>Some examples should illustrate the nature of these difficulties. Ephesians 4:8 quotes Psalm 68:18. Whereas the Hebrew and Septuagint read, “You ascended to the heights, you lead captivity captive, you received gifts among mankind,” Ephesians records the verse as “After he ascended into the heights, <em>he<\/em> led captivity captive; he <em>gave<\/em> gifts to men.” Paul is stressing that Christ has given grace to people for ministry. He has either adapted the wording of the OT to make his point or he quoted a variant reading, <em>“he gave<\/em> gifts.” Some versions do have this reading. In fact, the Targum understands this verse as Moses giving the words of the law to the children of men, and Paul may well be adapting this understanding to the new revelation that has come in Christ.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew 1:23 quotes Isaiah 7:14, but there are distinct differences between the Hebrew text and the wording in Matthew. The Hebrew reads, “Behold the young woman will become pregnant and will bear a son and you will call his name Immanuel,” whereas Matthew’s text records “Behold, the <em>virgin<\/em> will become pregnant and will bear a son, and <em>they<\/em> will call his name Immanuel.” The Septuagint does have the specific word “virgin,” like Matthew, but is not the source of Matthew’s quotation since other differences exist. Some have argued that the change from “you will call” to “they will call” was made by Matthew when he applied the words to Jesus. However, there are several traditions known for this part of the quotation and partial support for the reading in Matthew is provided by the text of Isaiah found among the Dead Sea Scrolls.<\/p>\n<p>Romans 11:26-27 is a conflation of Isaiah 59:20-21 and part of Isaiah 27:9, but there are important differences. One of these is that the OT has “the redeemer will come to Zion,” whereas Romans has “the deliverer will come <em>from<\/em> Zion.” The change to “from Zion” could indicate that Paul had a different textual tradition, could be the result of an intentional change by Paul, or more probably, could reflect the wording of Psalm 14:7.<\/p>\n<p>An awareness of the difficulties involved in the quotations of the OT by the NT writers will prohibit a simplistic approach and will prevent hasty conclusions. Care to ask not only which text was used but also which form of the text was used and how is obviously essential in any serious study. In addition it is necessary to allow for the possibility that the NT writers knew forms of a text that are now lost.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMethodsoftheNewTestamentWriters\">The Methods of the New Testament Writers<\/p>\n<p>The methods used by the NT writers were not unique to them. Many of these methods were also employed in first-century Judaism. In fact, both the technique used in quoting and the understanding of the OT text itself in many cases are paralleled in Judaism. For example, from the standpoint of technique used in quoting, the same kinds of formula introductions are used in the Dead Sea Scrolls, the rabbinic writings, and elsewhere. The rabbinic technique of “pearl stringing,” that is, of applying verses from various parts of the OT (the Law, the Prophets, the Writings) to a subject, can be seen especially in Paul’s writings (note Rom 9:12-19 or 11:8-10). Somewhat related is the practice of using quotations that all contain a key word or key words (note 1 Pt 2:6-8, which draws together quotations using the word “stone,” or Rom 15:9-12, which joins OT verses referring to the “nations”).<\/p>\n<p>The methods used in the NT to interpret an OT text are also displayed in Judaism. Some passages interpret the OT “literally,” such as Jesus’ replies during temptation (see the quotations of Dt 8:3; 6:16; 6:13; in Mt 4:3-10), his teachings on marriage based on Genesis 2:24 (Mt 19:5), or Paul’s use of Habakkuk 2:4 (Rom 1:17) or Genesis 15:6 (Rom 4:3-9). Many such examples could be given. With regard to prophecy, some of these statements are fulfilled in a “literal” or “direct” way in keeping with the intention of the OT (e.g., Mi 5:2, Bethlehem as the birthplace of the Messiah; Mt 2:4-6). Jeremiah 31:31-34, the promise of the new covenant, is viewed as directly fulfilled in Christ (Heb 8:7-13). The prophecy of Joel 2:28-32 concerning the pouring out of the Spirit of the Lord is directly fulfilled in the Pentecost event (Acts 2:17-21), but the changing of the sun to darkness and the moon to blood are certainly not understood literally in connection with this event.<\/p>\n<p>A different method of interpretation is based on the concept of <em>corporate solidarity.<\/em> This technical expression is an attempt to convey the idea that the individuals among God’s people are not merely individuals; they are part of a larger whole. Consequently, what is said about the individual can apply to the whole and vice versa. This is the reason the Servant of the Lord in Isaiah is seen both as the nation (44:1) and as an individual (52:13–53:12). Also the king is sometimes viewed as representative of the nation. The easiest places to see the concept of corporate solidarity are in the effect of the sin of Achan on all the people (Jos 7) or the sin of David in numbering the people (1 Chr 21:3-8).<\/p>\n<p><em>Correspondence in history<\/em> is not so much a method of interpretation as it is a way of thinking about God. It assumes that the things that happen to God’s people are the things that have happened to previous generations and that God is faithful and operates in the present as he has in the past. Consequently, the trials and deliverance of God’s people are often expressed with words borrowed from the previous accounts of God’s people. Isaiah describes the anticipated deliverance in terms of a second exodus (11:15-16). Ezekiel describes the king set up over the people in terms of a second David (Ez 37:25). In the NT, Revelation 22 describes the new heavens and the new earth in terms of the Garden of Eden (Gn 2–3). Sometimes this technique is described as “typology,” but this term has been used for so many questionable interpretations that it is misleading. The most important thing about this concept is that it is a view of God and his working among his people.<\/p>\n<p>With these two concepts, the way that the OT is quoted in the NT can be understood. The conviction that Jesus was the promised deliverer and that the last days had dawned in his ministry are evident everywhere. The quotation of Hosea 11:1 can be used in Matthew 2:15 because of corporate solidarity and correspondence in history. What was said of the nation is true of the one who is its representative, and there is correspondence in their respective histories. Jeremiah 31:15 can be used in Matthew 2:18 because of correspondence in history and especially because Jeremiah looked forward to God’s intention for Israel and prophesied a new covenant (31:17, 31-34). Matthew saw not only the correspondence in history but believed that in Jesus this promised salvation had been granted. John 12:40 can quote Isaiah 6:10 of Jesus’ ministry, not because he twists the meaning of the OT text, but because he saw that what had happened with God’s messenger before happened again and even <em>ultimately<\/em> in Jesus’ ministry. The instances of such correspondences in history are numerous.<\/p>\n<p>There are other texts where there seems to be an <em>actualization<\/em> of the OT text. Some quotations seem to be “lived out” in the ministry of Jesus. Because of their conviction about Jesus and his kingdom, the NT writers often saw certain OT texts as appropriated and made alive by Jesus. Psalm 118:22 was not intended as a prophecy of the Messiah, but Jesus saw it as descriptive of his ministry (Mt 21:42), and the early church saw this verse as actualized in his death and resurrection (Acts 4:11). Isaiah 53 is another text that the NT views as actualized in Jesus’ ministry (see Acts 8:32-35 and 1 Pt 2:22-25). Some Christians would view Psalm 22 as a prophecy of the crucifixion of Jesus, but it seems instead to be the lament of a righteous OT sufferer. Through correspondence in history, and because Christians saw so much of the psalmist’s plight actualized in Jesus’ crucifixion, the psalm became the easiest way to describe what once again had happened to God’s righteous sufferer. The words of Isaiah 40:3 describe the ministry of John the Baptist (Mt 3:3). Jews had come to see this verse as a prophecy of God’s end-time salvation, and the early church saw John the Baptist fulfilling this forerunner’s task. Luke made this identification (Lk 3:4-6), but he applied the same role to Jesus’ disciples (9:52; 10:1). This seems to be a further example of actualization and correspondence in history. In other places the church has applied to Christians ideas that were previously understood of Christ (e.g., the stone in 1 Pt 2:4-5; the ministry of the Suffering Servant in Acts 13:46-47).<\/p>\n<p>The most convenient term to describe the way the OT is “fulfilled” in Christ is to say that the OT finds its climax in Jesus. Even where actual quotations are not involved, the OT ideas such as prophet, priest, or king are climaxed in him as the ideal and embodiment of all the OT models. He could tell religious authorities that “one greater than Solomon is here” (Mt 12:42) or “one greater than the temple is here” (Mt 12:6). Those passages involving correspondence in history or actualization also lead to the conviction that he is the climax of the OT Scriptures.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePurposesoftheUseoftheOldTestament\">The Purposes of the Use of the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The variety of methods of interpretation and application of the OT parallels the fact that the OT was used for a variety of purposes. People tend to think only in terms of the use of the OT to show that Jesus was the Messiah, but there are a number of other uses with a variety of goals. Many OT texts are used to show Jesus is the Messiah, the fulfillment of the OT promises (Lk 4:16-21). Without lessening the fulfillment emphasis, however, other verses are applied to Jesus for other purposes: to evangelize (Acts 8:32-25); to demonstrate or convince (Acts 13:33-35); to rebuke (Mk 7:6-7; Rom 11:7-10); and to describe (Rv 1:12-15). On the other hand, many quotations of the OT in the NT are not directly related to the Messiah. OT passages are adapted to provide a word from God on some aspect of life or ethics. For example, Jesus used Genesis 2:24 to substantiate his teaching on divorce as he attempted to deal with the issues raised by the civil regulation of divorce (Dt 24:1; Mt 19:1-12). The stress on the OT commandments shows their importance for Christians (Mt 19:16-22; Rom 13:8-10). Often OT statements deal with specific problems. The problem of pride at Corinth is solved by the quotation of Jeremiah 9:24 (“Let the one boasting, boast in the Lord,” 1 Cor 1:31). First Peter 3:10-12 incorporates Psalm 34:12-16 as ethical instructions, and 3:14-15 borrows from Isaiah 8:12-13 to address the fear of suffering. The spiritual armor in Ephesians 6:14-17 is derived largely from OT passages. Such examples are so numerous that there can be no doubt that the OT is used to describe Christian existence. In fact, nearly every subject discussed in the NT is presented somewhere via OT terms and quotations. Frequently OT passages are used to describe the church as God’s end-time community. Hosea 2:23 is used to show that those who formerly were not God’s people now are (Rom 9:25-26; 1 Pt 2:10). Several OT texts contribute to the description of the church in 1 Peter 2:9. OT texts that speak of the word of God describe the apostles’ preaching (Rom 10:8; 1 Pt 1:24-25). OT quotations describe the sinful condition of humanity (Rom 3:10-20). Salvation is explained through OT concepts and symbols and is based on OT statements (Jn 6:31-33; Gal 3:6-13). The words of Daniel describe the Second Coming (7:13-14; cf. Mt 24:30). Even the worship of early Christians was expressed through use of the OT (see Acts 4:24; Rom 11:34-35).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BIBLE*, Q<span>uotations of the Old Testament in the New Testament<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>OT passages cited or alluded to in the NT writings.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most complex problems in interpreting the Bible is in understanding how NT writers quoted the OT. Obviously nothing is so formative and authoritative for the NT writers as Scripture. However, the way that they used OT passages often seems strange to modern readers.<\/p>\n<p>The OT has provided the words and ideas for much of the NT. Unless one has a Bible that prints OT quotations in distinctive print, this may not be easily seen, for the NT writers often weave the OT words into their own without indicating they are borrowing from the OT. There are over 400 passages of the OT that are explicitly cited in the NT. Almost half of these are introduced by a statement like “Scripture says” to draw attention to the fact that the authority and thought of the OT is being implemented. For the others, however, the OT words are woven into the fabric of the author’s own statement.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the over 400 passages cited explicitly, there are well over 1,000 places where there is an allusion to an OT text, event, or person. The difference between a quotation and an allusion is sometimes debated for particular texts, but usually the distinction is that in a quotation the author consciously uses the words of an OT passage, whereas with an allusion he has the texts in mind but is not consciously trying to use the words.<\/p>\n<p>Quotations are easy to identify if there is an introductory formula such as “the Scripture says” (as in Rom 10:11; cf. Is 28:16). Where there is no introductory formula, it is easy to overlook explicit quotations (Rom 10:13; cf. Jl 2:32). The allusions are, of course, harder still to recognize, but they often provide the key to interpretation. For example, John 1:14-18—with its mention of glory, grace and truth, Moses, and the fact that no one has seen God—is much more easily and profoundly understood when read in connection with Exodus 33:17–34:8. In the Exodus passage the glory of God and his grace and truth are revealed to Moses. The author was showing that a much more complete revelation of God was given in Jesus than was given Moses in the account recorded in Exodus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition, significant light is shed on many NT passages from OT passages with similar ideas and words even where the NT author may not have been consciously alluding to those texts (e.g. Mt 16:19; Is 22:22). What was behind the author’s thinking is not certain, but in such cases the NT reflects the thinking, the culture, and language of the OT period.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DistributionofOldTestamentQuotations\">Distribution of Old Testament Quotations<\/p>\n<p>The books of the NT that show the most dependence on the OT are Matthew, John, Romans, Hebrews, 1 Peter, and Revelation. Such a statement can be misleading, however, because the writers have different methods.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew quotes or consciously reflects the wording of OT passages about 62 times, almost half of which have an introductory formula. The book of Revelation, on the other hand, never quotes the OT and never has an introductory formula but is probably more dependent on the OT than any other NT book. The book of Hebrews quotes or consciously reflects the OT about 59 times, again half of which have an introductory formula, but the Gospel of John does so only 18 times, nearly always with an introductory formula. However, the allusions to the OT are present on virtually every page of John’s Gospel, so much so that some scholars have argued that he has modeled his account on the exodus narrative, the Jewish feasts, or OT persons and images. Paul’s Letter to the Romans uses the OT 54 times (about three-fourths of which have introductory formulas), but nowhere else so frequently (e.g., 1 Cor 16 times, Gal 11 times, Phil one time, 1 Thes one time).<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the indication that Philippians and 1 Thessalonians use the OT only once each, some other books make explicit use of the OT rarely or never. Colossians, Titus, Philemon, and the Johannine letters do not use the OT at all; 2 Timothy and Jude use the OT only once; while 2 Peter and 1 Timothy make use of it twice.<\/p>\n<p>The important point is to realize that the OT is used most frequently in circumstances where the audience is familiar with the OT or where the OT is essential for describing the events relating to Christ and the church. The books using the OT most frequently (Mt, Jn, Rom, Heb, 1 Pt, Rv) either stem from or are addressed to a Jewish context or, as in the case of Romans and John, deal specifically with the relation of Jews and Christians. The Gospels make rather extensive use of the OT because the language of the OT is necessary to convey the identity and importance of Jesus in the purposes of God. Similarly 1 Peter uses the OT frequently because the author is trying to convey to his persecuted audience that they are the people of God and the inheritors of the promises of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DifficultiesinInterpretation\">Difficulties in Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>Often when people think of quotations of the OT in the NT they think only in terms of prophecy. Some have been guilty of counting up the OT statements that the NT applies to Christ and the church and then claiming these OT texts as predictions that prove Jesus is the Messiah. Such a procedure is filled with problems because it is too simplistic and does not do justice to either the OT or to the way the NT uses it. Of course, the early church used the OT to show that Jesus fulfilled the promises of God and did God’s work, but the use the church made of the OT was quite varied and much of it cannot be classified as predictive prophecy. Prophecy itself is too complex to be limited to predictive thinking.<\/p>\n<p>Some of the most obvious examples of the difficulties appear in Matthew’s Gospel, although they are by no means confined there. Matthew 2:15—“Out of Egypt I called my son”—is a quotation of Hosea 11:1, but in Hosea these words do not refer to the Messiah. They refer to the nation of Israel. Similarly Matthew 2:18 quotes Jeremiah 31:15 (“A voice is heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more,” <span>niv<\/span>) as fulfilled in the slaughter of the innocent babies in Bethlehem, but in Jeremiah the weeping is over the destruction of Jerusalem. John 12:40 views Isaiah 6:10 as fulfilled in Jesus’ ministry, but this verse deals with the call of Isaiah and is not a prediction concerning the ministry of the Messiah. The examples could be multiplied but these should be sufficient to illustrate the problem. For this reason the NT writers have often been accused of twisting the Scriptures, but this charge is as simplistic as the thought that all prophecy is predictive and in fact springs from the same error. Therefore, any attempt to understand the use of the OT in the NT will have to deal with the variety of ways in which the OT is used and with the methods employed by the NT writers.<\/p>\n<p>There are other difficulties that are encountered as well. Sometimes the NT writer will indicate that some fact related to Christ is a fulfillment of the OT but the explicit text that he had in mind cannot be identified. For example, John 7:38 introduces the words “Out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water” with the statement “as Scripture has said.” No OT text reads this way. Possibly the allusion is to the rock that provided water in the wilderness (Ex 17:1), or to the waters that flowed from the new temple (Zec 14:8) or, more generally, it may be a reference to Isaiah 58:11. Similarly, the difficulty in determining the OT text behind the prophecy that Christ will be called a Nazarene (Mt 2:23) is notorious. Probably the reference is to Isaiah 11:1 and the Hebrew word there translated as “branch,” but the connection is not easily made and is not certain. A third example of this kind of difficulty is in 1 Corinthians 14:34, where Paul indicates that women should be in submission just as the Law says, but there is no OT text expressing this idea. His statement in probably to be understood as a summary rather than a quotation or allusion. Similarly on a few occasions an OT text is seemingly attributed to the wrong OT book. In Mark 1:2-3 an OT quotation is attributed to Isaiah but the quotation is really a conflation (or mixing) of Exodus 23:20, Malachi 3:1, and Isaiah 40:3. Matthew 27:9-10 quotes a passage that is said to be from Jeremiah, when really it is dependent on Zechariah 11:13 and might best be described as a summary of Zechariah 11:12-13, with certain words included from Jeremiah 32:6-9. These two examples do not create a major problem, however, for the determination of the origin of the words may be due to their use in collections of quotations from various prophets, in which case the more prominent prophets would be used to designate origin.<\/p>\n<p>The wording of the quotations of the OT text does not always conform to the modern form of the OT. Just as today there are numerous translations of the Bible, when the NT was being written there were various forms of the OT text. With regard to the Hebrew text (for the OT was written mostly in Hebrew), there were different traditions. Such differences in the Hebrew traditions would have been relatively small. Because of the increasing importance of Aramaic after the Babylonian captivity and of Greek after the conquests of Alexander the Great, the OT was also known and used in both these languages when the NT was being written. In fact, the Jews found it necessary in their synagogue services after reading the Hebrew OT to paraphrase the reading in Aramaic so that all could understand. These paraphrases were later written down and are known as Targums. The Greek translation of the OT that stems from the third century <span>BC<\/span> is known as the Septuagint, but there were also other Greek translations in use. This being the case, the wording of a NT quotation is not identical in every detail to the text of the Hebrew OT.<\/p>\n<p>Added to the fact that there were various forms of the text known in first-century <span>AD<\/span> Palestine is the complicating factor that NT writers often did not intend to quote the OT exactly. The use of formal quotation marks is a modern device, and ancient writers were not so taken by technical precision. They were more concerned with the intention of a text and consequently might copy or quote it verbatim, quote it from memory, use or adapt part of a verse, or even change certain words as they borrowed the verse to express their points. (The NT writers often use the OT words describing God’s actions in the past to explain what he has done in their time.) The importance of any differences between the NT quotation and the OT depends on the use to which the quotation is put and the degree to which the use is dependent on textual differences.<\/p>\n<p>Some examples should illustrate the nature of these difficulties. Ephesians 4:8 quotes Psalm 68:18. Whereas the Hebrew and Septuagint read, “You ascended to the heights, you lead captivity captive, you received gifts among mankind,” Ephesians records the verse as “After he ascended into the heights, <em>he<\/em> led captivity captive; he <em>gave<\/em> gifts to men.” Paul is stressing that Christ has given grace to people for ministry. He has either adapted the wording of the OT to make his point or he quoted a variant reading, <em>“he gave<\/em> gifts.” Some versions do have this reading. In fact, the Targum understands this verse as Moses giving the words of the law to the children of men, and Paul may well be adapting this understanding to the new revelation that has come in Christ.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew 1:23 quotes Isaiah 7:14, but there are distinct differences between the Hebrew text and the wording in Matthew. The Hebrew reads, “Behold the young woman will become pregnant and will bear a son and you will call his name Immanuel,” whereas Matthew’s text records “Behold, the <em>virgin<\/em> will become pregnant and will bear a son, and <em>they<\/em> will call his name Immanuel.” The Septuagint does have the specific word “virgin,” like Matthew, but is not the source of Matthew’s quotation since other differences exist. Some have argued that the change from “you will call” to “they will call” was made by Matthew when he applied the words to Jesus. However, there are several traditions known for this part of the quotation and partial support for the reading in Matthew is provided by the text of Isaiah found among the Dead Sea Scrolls.<\/p>\n<p>Romans 11:26-27 is a conflation of Isaiah 59:20-21 and part of Isaiah 27:9, but there are important differences. One of these is that the OT has “the redeemer will come to Zion,” whereas Romans has “the deliverer will come <em>from<\/em> Zion.” The change to “from Zion” could indicate that Paul had a different textual tradition, could be the result of an intentional change by Paul, or more probably, could reflect the wording of Psalm 14:7.<\/p>\n<p>An awareness of the difficulties involved in the quotations of the OT by the NT writers will prohibit a simplistic approach and will prevent hasty conclusions. Care to ask not only which text was used but also which form of the text was used and how is obviously essential in any serious study. In addition it is necessary to allow for the possibility that the NT writers knew forms of a text that are now lost.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMethodsoftheNewTestamentWriters\">The Methods of the New Testament Writers<\/p>\n<p>The methods used by the NT writers were not unique to them. Many of these methods were also employed in first-century Judaism. In fact, both the technique used in quoting and the understanding of the OT text itself in many cases are paralleled in Judaism. For example, from the standpoint of technique used in quoting, the same kinds of formula introductions are used in the Dead Sea Scrolls, the rabbinic writings, and elsewhere. The rabbinic technique of “pearl stringing,” that is, of applying verses from various parts of the OT (the Law, the Prophets, the Writings) to a subject, can be seen especially in Paul’s writings (note Rom 9:12-19 or 11:8-10). Somewhat related is the practice of using quotations that all contain a key word or key words (note 1 Pt 2:6-8, which draws together quotations using the word “stone,” or Rom 15:9-12, which joins OT verses referring to the “nations”).<\/p>\n<p>The methods used in the NT to interpret an OT text are also displayed in Judaism. Some passages interpret the OT “literally,” such as Jesus’ replies during temptation (see the quotations of Dt 8:3; 6:16; 6:13; in Mt 4:3-10), his teachings on marriage based on Genesis 2:24 (Mt 19:5), or Paul’s use of Habakkuk 2:4 (Rom 1:17) or Genesis 15:6 (Rom 4:3-9). Many such examples could be given. With regard to prophecy, some of these statements are fulfilled in a “literal” or “direct” way in keeping with the intention of the OT (e.g., Mi 5:2, Bethlehem as the birthplace of the Messiah; Mt 2:4-6). Jeremiah 31:31-34, the promise of the new covenant, is viewed as directly fulfilled in Christ (Heb 8:7-13). The prophecy of Joel 2:28-32 concerning the pouring out of the Spirit of the Lord is directly fulfilled in the Pentecost event (Acts 2:17-21), but the changing of the sun to darkness and the moon to blood are certainly not understood literally in connection with this event.<\/p>\n<p>A different method of interpretation is based on the concept of <em>corporate solidarity.<\/em> This technical expression is an attempt to convey the idea that the individuals among God’s people are not merely individuals; they are part of a larger whole. Consequently, what is said about the individual can apply to the whole and vice versa. This is the reason the Servant of the Lord in Isaiah is seen both as the nation (44:1) and as an individual (52:13–53:12). Also the king is sometimes viewed as representative of the nation. The easiest places to see the concept of corporate solidarity are in the effect of the sin of Achan on all the people (Jos 7) or the sin of David in numbering the people (1 Chr 21:3-8).<\/p>\n<p><em>Correspondence in history<\/em> is not so much a method of interpretation as it is a way of thinking about God. It assumes that the things that happen to God’s people are the things that have happened to previous generations and that God is faithful and operates in the present as he has in the past. Consequently, the trials and deliverance of God’s people are often expressed with words borrowed from the previous accounts of God’s people. Isaiah describes the anticipated deliverance in terms of a second exodus (11:15-16). Ezekiel describes the king set up over the people in terms of a second David (Ez 37:25). In the NT, Revelation 22 describes the new heavens and the new earth in terms of the Garden of Eden (Gn 2–3). Sometimes this technique is described as “typology,” but this term has been used for so many questionable interpretations that it is misleading. The most important thing about this concept is that it is a view of God and his working among his people.<\/p>\n<p>With these two concepts, the way that the OT is quoted in the NT can be understood. The conviction that Jesus was the promised deliverer and that the last days had dawned in his ministry are evident everywhere. The quotation of Hosea 11:1 can be used in Matthew 2:15 because of corporate solidarity and correspondence in history. What was said of the nation is true of the one who is its representative, and there is correspondence in their respective histories. Jeremiah 31:15 can be used in Matthew 2:18 because of correspondence in history and especially because Jeremiah looked forward to God’s intention for Israel and prophesied a new covenant (31:17, 31-34). Matthew saw not only the correspondence in history but believed that in Jesus this promised salvation had been granted. John 12:40 can quote Isaiah 6:10 of Jesus’ ministry, not because he twists the meaning of the OT text, but because he saw that what had happened with God’s messenger before happened again and even <em>ultimately<\/em> in Jesus’ ministry. The instances of such correspondences in history are numerous.<\/p>\n<p>There are other texts where there seems to be an <em>actualization<\/em> of the OT text. Some quotations seem to be “lived out” in the ministry of Jesus. Because of their conviction about Jesus and his kingdom, the NT writers often saw certain OT texts as appropriated and made alive by Jesus. Psalm 118:22 was not intended as a prophecy of the Messiah, but Jesus saw it as descriptive of his ministry (Mt 21:42), and the early church saw this verse as actualized in his death and resurrection (Acts 4:11). Isaiah 53 is another text that the NT views as actualized in Jesus’ ministry (see Acts 8:32-35 and 1 Pt 2:22-25). Some Christians would view Psalm 22 as a prophecy of the crucifixion of Jesus, but it seems instead to be the lament of a righteous OT sufferer. Through correspondence in history, and because Christians saw so much of the psalmist’s plight actualized in Jesus’ crucifixion, the psalm became the easiest way to describe what once again had happened to God’s righteous sufferer. The words of Isaiah 40:3 describe the ministry of John the Baptist (Mt 3:3). Jews had come to see this verse as a prophecy of God’s end-time salvation, and the early church saw John the Baptist fulfilling this forerunner’s task. Luke made this identification (Lk 3:4-6), but he applied the same role to Jesus’ disciples (9:52; 10:1). This seems to be a further example of actualization and correspondence in history. In other places the church has applied to Christians ideas that were previously understood of Christ (e.g., the stone in 1 Pt 2:4-5; the ministry of the Suffering Servant in Acts 13:46-47).<\/p>\n<p>The most convenient term to describe the way the OT is “fulfilled” in Christ is to say that the OT finds its climax in Jesus. Even where actual quotations are not involved, the OT ideas such as prophet, priest, or king are climaxed in him as the ideal and embodiment of all the OT models. He could tell religious authorities that “one greater than Solomon is here” (Mt 12:42) or “one greater than the temple is here” (Mt 12:6). Those passages involving correspondence in history or actualization also lead to the conviction that he is the climax of the OT Scriptures.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePurposesoftheUseoftheOldTestament\">The Purposes of the Use of the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The variety of methods of interpretation and application of the OT parallels the fact that the OT was used for a variety of purposes. People tend to think only in terms of the use of the OT to show that Jesus was the Messiah, but there are a number of other uses with a variety of goals. Many OT texts are used to show Jesus is the Messiah, the fulfillment of the OT promises (Lk 4:16-21). Without lessening the fulfillment emphasis, however, other verses are applied to Jesus for other purposes: to evangelize (Acts 8:32-25); to demonstrate or convince (Acts 13:33-35); to rebuke (Mk 7:6-7; Rom 11:7-10); and to describe (Rv 1:12-15). On the other hand, many quotations of the OT in the NT are not directly related to the Messiah. OT passages are adapted to provide a word from God on some aspect of life or ethics. For example, Jesus used Genesis 2:24 to substantiate his teaching on divorce as he attempted to deal with the issues raised by the civil regulation of divorce (Dt 24:1; Mt 19:1-12). The stress on the OT commandments shows their importance for Christians (Mt 19:16-22; Rom 13:8-10). Often OT statements deal with specific problems. The problem of pride at Corinth is solved by the quotation of Jeremiah 9:24 (“Let the one boasting, boast in the Lord,” 1 Cor 1:31). First Peter 3:10-12 incorporates Psalm 34:12-16 as ethical instructions, and 3:14-15 borrows from Isaiah 8:12-13 to address the fear of suffering. The spiritual armor in Ephesians 6:14-17 is derived largely from OT passages. Such examples are so numerous that there can be no doubt that the OT is used to describe Christian existence. In fact, nearly every subject discussed in the NT is presented somewhere via OT terms and quotations. Frequently OT passages are used to describe the church as God’s end-time community. Hosea 2:23 is used to show that those who formerly were not God’s people now are (Rom 9:25-26; 1 Pt 2:10). Several OT texts contribute to the description of the church in 1 Peter 2:9. OT texts that speak of the word of God describe the apostles’ preaching (Rom 10:8; 1 Pt 1:24-25). OT quotations describe the sinful condition of humanity (Rom 3:10-20). Salvation is explained through OT concepts and symbols and is based on OT statements (Jn 6:31-33; Gal 3:6-13). The words of Daniel describe the Second Coming (7:13-14; cf. Mt 24:30). Even the worship of early Christians was expressed through use of the OT (see Acts 4:24; Rom 11:34-35).<\/p>","summary_ro":"BIBLE*, Quotations of the Old Testament in the New Testament OT passages cited or alluded to in the NT writings. One of the most complex problems in interpreting the Bible is in understanding how NT writers quoted the OT. Obviously nothing is so formative and authoritative for the NT writers as Scripture. However, the way that they used OT passages often seems strange to modern readers. The OT has provided the words and ideas for much of the NT. Unless one has a Bible that prints OT quotation...","summary_en":"BIBLE*, Quotations of the Old Testament in the New Testament OT passages cited or alluded to in the NT writings. One of the most complex problems in interpreting the Bible is in understanding how NT writers quoted the OT. Obviously nothing is so formative and authoritative for the NT writers as Scripture. However, the way that they used OT passages often seems strange to modern readers. The OT has provided the words and ideas for much of the NT. Unless one has a Bible that prints OT quotation...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":5380,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Body of Christ","title_en":"Body of Christ","content_ro":"<h3>BODY OF CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Scriptural phrase referring to (1) the physical body of Jesus Christ, (2) his broken body and shed blood viewed symbolically and memorially in the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper, and (3) both the local and universal church viewed metaphorically.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePhysicalBodyofJesusChrist\">The Physical Body of Jesus Christ<\/p>\n<p>The NT declares that the Son (the second person of the Trinity) had a human body prepared for him by God the Father (Heb 10:5). The earthly body was engendered by the conceptive work of the Holy Spirit through the virgin Mary (Mt 1:20); the one thus born, humanly speaking, as a descendant of David (Rom 1:3), was also to be called the Son of God (Lk 1:35). The apostle John emphasized that the body of Christ was really human physically, not something gaseous or ethereal (1 Jn 4:2-3) as some persons in John’s day were already beginning to argue. God “became flesh and dwelt among us” (Jn 1:14; cf. Is 53:1-4). Jesus’ earthly body possessed ordinary human characteristics and limitations. That is, as a real human being, Jesus Christ experienced sorrow (Jn 11:35; Heb 5:7-8), weariness (Jn 4:6), thirst (19:28), and pain (vv 1-3).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus gave up his spirit, his physical body died on the cross (Jn 19:30, 33). The NT proclaims that he bore the sins of the world in his body on the cross (1 Pt 2:24; 1 Jn 2:2; cf. Is 53:5-6). His death is described as a perfect sacrifice for sinners (Heb 9:12-14, 26-28), a sacrifice of his body that makes believers in him holy and righteous (2 Cor 5:21; Heb 10:10).<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s physical body was prepared in the normal way for burial (Mt 27:59; Mk 15:46; Lk 23:53, 56; 24:1; Jn 19:39-40) and placed in the rock tomb of Joseph of Arimathea (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:41). On the third day the body of Christ experienced a real physical resurrection, as he had predicted (Jn 2:19-22). He was seen in his physical resurrection body (Mt 28:9; Lk 24:31, 36; Jn 20:10-19, 26). He was heard, touched, and held onto (Mt 28:9; Lk 24:39; Jn 20:17; 1 Jn 1:1). He offered his body, scarred by his crucifixion, to be touched (Lk 24:39; Jn 20:17). The fact that he ate shows that his resurrection body was a physical one (Lk 24:42-43). In addition, Christ’s body was “glorified,” that is, it was not restricted as ordinary bodies are: he entered and left rooms in a remarkable way (Lk 24:31, 36; Jn 20:19, 26). Christ’s bodily resurrection is said in Scripture to guarantee that believers in Christ will experience resurrection of their own bodies (1 Cor 15:20-23, 50-57; Phil 3:20-21).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBodyofChristintheLordsSupper\">The Body of Christ in the Lord’s Supper<\/p>\n<p>At the last supper (Mt 26:26-29; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:15-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26), which accompanied the Passover supper, Jesus held up a loaf of bread and said, “This is my body”; then he picked up a cup of wine and said, “This is my blood of the covenant” (Mt 26:26, 28). Jesus meant that the bread symbolized his body, which would be broken when he was beaten at his trial and pierced at his crucifixion (Lk 23:33; Jn 19:1-2). The apostle Paul said that Christ, our paschal lamb, was sacrificed for us (1 Cor 5:7), meaning that the Passover lamb in the OT was an object lesson pointing to “the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!” (Jn 1:29).<\/p>\n<p>For Christians, the body of Christ is viewed symbolically as a broken body (Mt 8:17; 1 Pt 2:24; cf. Is 53:4-5) in the breaking of the bread at the Lord’s Supper. The cup is a sign of his blood poured out, viewed as the central factor in God’s covenant of grace with his people. Jesus referred to “the new covenant in my blood” (Lk 22:20). The whole ceremony of the Lord’s Supper was also to be a memorial (1 Cor 11:25-26). In the ceremony believers are reminded that Christ died for sinners, that is, for the forgiveness of their sins (Mt 26:28). They are also reminded that they are participating in the body of Christ in that they are united with him (Rom 6:1-11; 1 Cor 10:16; Gal 2:20; Phil 3:10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBodyofChristthePeopleofGod\">The Body of Christ, the People of God<\/p>\n<p>The phrase “body of Christ” is also used as a metaphor for the whole church, a unity of believers connected with and dependent on Christ. God’s people are thus said to be members of Christ’s “mystical body” (1 Cor 12:27), in fellowship with Christ and spiritually nourished by him (Eph 5:25, 29). A number of other metaphors are also used for the whole people of God, such as the vine (Ps 80:8), temple of God (1 Cor 3:16-17), building (1 Pt 2:5), chosen people (v 9), and family of God (Eph 3:15). Such metaphors amplify the interrelatedness, communion, and dependence of the “body of Christ” upon the living God.<\/p>\n<p>The term “body of Christ” was often used by Paul to remind a local church that it was a vital part of the larger body. Paul said to the church at Rome, “For as in one body we have many members, and all the members do not have the same function, so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another” (Rom 12:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). Paul taught the Corinthian Christians that they, individually and collectively, were part of the body of Christ (1 Cor 12:27). They and Paul were all baptized by one Spirit into that one body (Eph 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>In a number of passages written by Paul, the church is called the “body” and Christ the “head” (Col 1:18). Christ has been made “head over all things for the church,” which “is his body” (Eph 1:22-23). The body grows by “holding fast to the Head” (Col 2:19). As head of the body, Christ is its Savior (Eph 5:23). The head\/body metaphor stresses the organic dependence of the church on Christ and his lordship over the church. The church finds its self-understanding in terms of its Head. The relationship is organic in that the life flows from, and is sustained by, the Head. The relationship is immediate, direct, and complete. Apart from Christ, both in his historic atoning sacrifice and in his present position at the right hand of God, the church has no existence.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the term “body of Christ” is used to mean both the universal church and each local group of believers. In both senses the church is said to be the spiritual body in which believing Jews and Gentiles are united (Eph 2:14-16; 3:6; 4:4). It is the body that Christ redeemed (Eph 5:23), over which he presides (Col 1:18) and sovereignly rules (Eph 1:22-23) and for which he supplies strength and unity (Eph 4:15-16; Col 2:19).<\/p>\n<p>Each member of the body of Christ has been given spiritual gifts with which to serve Christ in the body (Rom 12:6; 1 Cor 12:11). Such gifts are enumerated several times in Scripture, and range from apostleship and pastoring to encouraging and showing mercy (Rom 12:7-8; Eph 4:11). The ministry of serving is to be shared by all Christians, for example, through giving to the physical needs of others (Acts 11:29-30; 1 Cor 16:1-4; 2 Cor 8:1-5) and praying for one another (Eph 1:15-23; 3:14-19; 6:18-20). No one should look down on others or on their gifts, since God has chosen each one to function in his or her place in the body (1 Cor 12:14-26). The gifts are given to equip “the saints, for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ” (Eph 4:12-13, <span>rsv<\/span>). The goal is “to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ” (vv 15-16, <span>rsv<\/span>). <em>See<\/em> Body; Church; Lord’s Supper, The; Resurrection.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BODY OF CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Scriptural phrase referring to (1) the physical body of Jesus Christ, (2) his broken body and shed blood viewed symbolically and memorially in the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper, and (3) both the local and universal church viewed metaphorically.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePhysicalBodyofJesusChrist\">The Physical Body of Jesus Christ<\/p>\n<p>The NT declares that the Son (the second person of the Trinity) had a human body prepared for him by God the Father (Heb 10:5). The earthly body was engendered by the conceptive work of the Holy Spirit through the virgin Mary (Mt 1:20); the one thus born, humanly speaking, as a descendant of David (Rom 1:3), was also to be called the Son of God (Lk 1:35). The apostle John emphasized that the body of Christ was really human physically, not something gaseous or ethereal (1 Jn 4:2-3) as some persons in John’s day were already beginning to argue. God “became flesh and dwelt among us” (Jn 1:14; cf. Is 53:1-4). Jesus’ earthly body possessed ordinary human characteristics and limitations. That is, as a real human being, Jesus Christ experienced sorrow (Jn 11:35; Heb 5:7-8), weariness (Jn 4:6), thirst (19:28), and pain (vv 1-3).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus gave up his spirit, his physical body died on the cross (Jn 19:30, 33). The NT proclaims that he bore the sins of the world in his body on the cross (1 Pt 2:24; 1 Jn 2:2; cf. Is 53:5-6). His death is described as a perfect sacrifice for sinners (Heb 9:12-14, 26-28), a sacrifice of his body that makes believers in him holy and righteous (2 Cor 5:21; Heb 10:10).<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s physical body was prepared in the normal way for burial (Mt 27:59; Mk 15:46; Lk 23:53, 56; 24:1; Jn 19:39-40) and placed in the rock tomb of Joseph of Arimathea (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:41). On the third day the body of Christ experienced a real physical resurrection, as he had predicted (Jn 2:19-22). He was seen in his physical resurrection body (Mt 28:9; Lk 24:31, 36; Jn 20:10-19, 26). He was heard, touched, and held onto (Mt 28:9; Lk 24:39; Jn 20:17; 1 Jn 1:1). He offered his body, scarred by his crucifixion, to be touched (Lk 24:39; Jn 20:17). The fact that he ate shows that his resurrection body was a physical one (Lk 24:42-43). In addition, Christ’s body was “glorified,” that is, it was not restricted as ordinary bodies are: he entered and left rooms in a remarkable way (Lk 24:31, 36; Jn 20:19, 26). Christ’s bodily resurrection is said in Scripture to guarantee that believers in Christ will experience resurrection of their own bodies (1 Cor 15:20-23, 50-57; Phil 3:20-21).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBodyofChristintheLordsSupper\">The Body of Christ in the Lord’s Supper<\/p>\n<p>At the last supper (Mt 26:26-29; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:15-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26), which accompanied the Passover supper, Jesus held up a loaf of bread and said, “This is my body”; then he picked up a cup of wine and said, “This is my blood of the covenant” (Mt 26:26, 28). Jesus meant that the bread symbolized his body, which would be broken when he was beaten at his trial and pierced at his crucifixion (Lk 23:33; Jn 19:1-2). The apostle Paul said that Christ, our paschal lamb, was sacrificed for us (1 Cor 5:7), meaning that the Passover lamb in the OT was an object lesson pointing to “the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!” (Jn 1:29).<\/p>\n<p>For Christians, the body of Christ is viewed symbolically as a broken body (Mt 8:17; 1 Pt 2:24; cf. Is 53:4-5) in the breaking of the bread at the Lord’s Supper. The cup is a sign of his blood poured out, viewed as the central factor in God’s covenant of grace with his people. Jesus referred to “the new covenant in my blood” (Lk 22:20). The whole ceremony of the Lord’s Supper was also to be a memorial (1 Cor 11:25-26). In the ceremony believers are reminded that Christ died for sinners, that is, for the forgiveness of their sins (Mt 26:28). They are also reminded that they are participating in the body of Christ in that they are united with him (Rom 6:1-11; 1 Cor 10:16; Gal 2:20; Phil 3:10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBodyofChristthePeopleofGod\">The Body of Christ, the People of God<\/p>\n<p>The phrase “body of Christ” is also used as a metaphor for the whole church, a unity of believers connected with and dependent on Christ. God’s people are thus said to be members of Christ’s “mystical body” (1 Cor 12:27), in fellowship with Christ and spiritually nourished by him (Eph 5:25, 29). A number of other metaphors are also used for the whole people of God, such as the vine (Ps 80:8), temple of God (1 Cor 3:16-17), building (1 Pt 2:5), chosen people (v 9), and family of God (Eph 3:15). Such metaphors amplify the interrelatedness, communion, and dependence of the “body of Christ” upon the living God.<\/p>\n<p>The term “body of Christ” was often used by Paul to remind a local church that it was a vital part of the larger body. Paul said to the church at Rome, “For as in one body we have many members, and all the members do not have the same function, so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another” (Rom 12:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). Paul taught the Corinthian Christians that they, individually and collectively, were part of the body of Christ (1 Cor 12:27). They and Paul were all baptized by one Spirit into that one body (Eph 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>In a number of passages written by Paul, the church is called the “body” and Christ the “head” (Col 1:18). Christ has been made “head over all things for the church,” which “is his body” (Eph 1:22-23). The body grows by “holding fast to the Head” (Col 2:19). As head of the body, Christ is its Savior (Eph 5:23). The head\/body metaphor stresses the organic dependence of the church on Christ and his lordship over the church. The church finds its self-understanding in terms of its Head. The relationship is organic in that the life flows from, and is sustained by, the Head. The relationship is immediate, direct, and complete. Apart from Christ, both in his historic atoning sacrifice and in his present position at the right hand of God, the church has no existence.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the term “body of Christ” is used to mean both the universal church and each local group of believers. In both senses the church is said to be the spiritual body in which believing Jews and Gentiles are united (Eph 2:14-16; 3:6; 4:4). It is the body that Christ redeemed (Eph 5:23), over which he presides (Col 1:18) and sovereignly rules (Eph 1:22-23) and for which he supplies strength and unity (Eph 4:15-16; Col 2:19).<\/p>\n<p>Each member of the body of Christ has been given spiritual gifts with which to serve Christ in the body (Rom 12:6; 1 Cor 12:11). Such gifts are enumerated several times in Scripture, and range from apostleship and pastoring to encouraging and showing mercy (Rom 12:7-8; Eph 4:11). The ministry of serving is to be shared by all Christians, for example, through giving to the physical needs of others (Acts 11:29-30; 1 Cor 16:1-4; 2 Cor 8:1-5) and praying for one another (Eph 1:15-23; 3:14-19; 6:18-20). No one should look down on others or on their gifts, since God has chosen each one to function in his or her place in the body (1 Cor 12:14-26). The gifts are given to equip “the saints, for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ” (Eph 4:12-13, <span>rsv<\/span>). The goal is “to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ” (vv 15-16, <span>rsv<\/span>). <em>See<\/em> Body; Church; Lord’s Supper, The; Resurrection.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BODY OF CHRIST Scriptural phrase referring to (1) the physical body of Jesus Christ, (2) his broken body and shed blood viewed symbolically and memorially in the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper, and (3) both the local and universal church viewed metaphorically. The Physical Body of Jesus Christ The NT declares that the Son (the second person of the Trinity) had a human body prepared for him by God the Father (Heb 10:5). The earthly body was engendered by the conceptive work of the Holy Sp...","summary_en":"BODY OF CHRIST Scriptural phrase referring to (1) the physical body of Jesus Christ, (2) his broken body and shed blood viewed symbolically and memorially in the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper, and (3) both the local and universal church viewed metaphorically. The Physical Body of Jesus Christ The NT declares that the Son (the second person of the Trinity) had a human body prepared for him by God the Father (Heb 10:5). The earthly body was engendered by the conceptive work of the Holy Sp...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":6340,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Christology*","title_en":"Christology*","content_ro":"<h3>CHRISTOLOGY*<\/h3>\n<p>The study of the person and work of Jesus Christ. The confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God, first ventured by Peter at Caesarea Philippi (Mt 16:16), is the heart of the Christian faith. It is this confession that makes one a Christian, and all Christian theology is thinking, in the light of this confession, about the meaning of this confession. The first major theological decision of the church resulting from such believing thought was the affirmation of the essential deity of Jesus as the Son of God. As such he was declared to be of one essence with the Father and the Spirit (the dogma of the Trinity promulgated at Nicaea, <span>AD<\/span> 325). Since this affirmation was made with reference to the man Jesus of Nazareth, it forced upon the church, inescapably, the further question: How could one and the same person be both God and man? How could he who is infinite become finite; he who is eternal become temporal; he who is God become man?<\/p>\n<p>To answer this question, the church embraced the doctrine of the Incarnation. The statement of the doctrine was arrived at only after much controversy. In the course of the debate the church rejected all efforts, on the one hand, to preserve the deity of the Son at the expense of his humanity (docetism), and on the other, to preserve his humanity at the expense of his deity (adoptionism). In the former category were the doctrines of those who claimed that the Son only <em>seemed<\/em> to have a human body, or (like the Apollinarians) that while he had a true body and soul, the divine Logos took the place of the human spirit. In the latter category was the doctrine of those who claimed that the man Jesus, through the process of moral development, was elevated to divine sonship and so adopted into the Godhead. Some placed great stress on Jesus’ endowment with the Spirit at baptism as the moment of his adoption, while others, citing Acts 13:33—“today I have begotten thee”—believed Jesus became the unique Son of God at the resurrection. The church also rejected all attempts to resolve the problem of the Savior’s divinity and humanity by suggesting that he was both a divine person and a human person (Nestorianism) or, contrariwise, that the unity of his person implied a fusion of the divine and human in one nature (monophysitism).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheChalcedonianCreed\">The Chalcedonian Creed<\/p>\n<p>At the Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon (<span>AD<\/span> 451), the position was adopted that the Lord Jesus Christ was truly God and truly man <em>(vere Deo, vere homo).<\/em> The creed said:<\/p>\n<p>[He is] consubstantial with the Father as to his Godhead, and consubstantial also with us as to his manhood; like unto us in all things, yet without sin; as to his Godhead, begotten of the Father before all worlds; but as to his manhood, in these days, born for us men and for our salvation, of the virgin Mary, the mother of God, one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, only-begotten, known in two natures, without confusion, without conversion, without severance, and without division; the distinction of the natures being in no wise abolished by their union, but the peculiarity of each nature being maintained, and both concurring in one person and subsistence. We confess not a Son divided and sundered into two persons, but one and the same Son, and only-begotten, and God-Logos, our Lord Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>This confession was adopted in all its essential features by the Reformers at the time of the Protestant Reformation.<\/p>\n<p>Chalcedonian Christology does not remove the mystery of the Incarnation but rather indicates, as it were, the boundaries of believing thought about the person of the Redeemer, boundaries that have proved significant in the history of Christian thought. As for the key terms in the creed, the following should be noted: the word “nature” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">physis<\/span><em>)<\/em> as used by the church fathers does not have reference to the physical, material order that is the object of investigation by the “natural” sciences. “Nature” rather refers to being or reality in distinction from appearance. To say that Jesus Christ has a divine nature is to affirm that all the qualities, properties, or attributes by which one describes the divine order of being pertain to him. In short, he is God himself, not <em>like<\/em> God, but just <em>God.<\/em> So also with the affirmation that Christ has a human nature. Christ is not God <em>appearing<\/em> as a man; he <em>is<\/em> a man. He is not <em>only<\/em> a man nor <em>only<\/em> God; he is the God who <em>became<\/em> a man. He did not cease to be God when he became a man; he did not exchange divinity for humanity. Rather, he assumed humanity, so that he is now both divine and human. He is the God-man.<\/p>\n<p>The term “person” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">hypostasis<\/span><em>)<\/em> was used by the fathers to describe Jesus Christ as a self-conscious, self-determined Subject, one who designates himself by the word “I” over against a “thou.” The Mediator between God and man is <em>a person<\/em> who has a divine nature and a human nature. While there can be no “person” where there is no “nature,” it does not follow that there is no distinction between the terms, for there can be a “nature,” as defined above, where there is no “person.” (An object may have the properties of “nature” of a stone: grayness, hardness, roundness, smoothness. But this object, which has the “nature” of a stone, is not a “person”; it is not self-conscious and self-determined.)<\/p>\n<p>The distinction between the “person” and the “nature” of the incarnate Christ speaks of him as being a “person” with a “divine nature” and a “human nature.” The fathers were teaching through this that while we must ascribe to Christ all the qualities that belong to the divine order of being and to the human order of being (including bodily, physical, objective being—the Word “became flesh,” Jn 1:14), we cannot say that he is “two persons.” He is a divine person with a human nature, not a human person as such. All human persons have a first moment. Wheresoever and whensoever we may identify that first moment for a human “I,” whether at conception or at fetal quickening in the womb, whether at the moment of birth, or even as late as the first moment of self-awareness in the young child, no human “I” is aware of himself as a “subject,” as an “I,” before he is conceived in the womb of his mother. The man Jesus of Nazareth, however, unlike any mere man, could say, “Before Abraham was, I am” (Jn 8:58). This affirmation is neither the late theological invention of Christian fancy nor the claim of a man suffering from delusions of grandeur, but rather the sober truth. This person sitting on a mountainside preaching, this person standing by the sea calling fishermen to be his disciples, is a person who always was a person, even before there were any fishermen by the sea to call or any people to preach to on the mountainside—in fact, before there was any sea or any mountain.<\/p>\n<p>Christ is not the divine Logos, who inspires and uniquely endows the man, Jesus of Nazareth, with moral and religious insights. Rather, this man Jesus is the eternal Son of God, and God’s eternal Son has become this man, Jesus. The Son of God did not assume a man’s <em>person<\/em> to his own <em>nature,<\/em> but a man’s <em>nature<\/em> to his own <em>person.<\/em> He continues to be the same person, though he now assumes our humanity. Hence, he can speak both as a Subject consciously in history and as a Subject consciously transcending history, even in one and the same sentence. <em>“I<\/em> have glorified thee <em>on the earth: I<\/em> have finished the work which thou gavest me to do. And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which <em>I<\/em> had with thee <em>before the world was”<\/em> (Jn 17:4-5, <span>kjv<\/span>, emphasis added). Here the same person, Jesus, speaks as a person in the world, an “I” who has done certain things in the world, and as a person before there was any world, an “I” who shared his glory with a “thou” whom he calls “Father” before all time. All efforts at rational analysis of this mystery, which the church designates by the word “incarnation,” run the risk of losing the truth by explaining it. One arrives at a position in which Christ is a divine being who appears human (docetism) or a human being who either achieves divine status for himself (adoptionism) or divine worth for us (Ritschlianism).<\/p>\n<p>In order to preserve fully both our Lord’s deity and his humanity, the creed employs four terms in which we are told what did <em>not<\/em> happen in the Incarnation. The union of the two natures is declared to be “without confusion,” “without conversion,” “without separation,” and “without division.” Some have ridiculed these “four bald negatives,” but they are by no means wholly without value. Should any of these basic negatives be violated, we would lose what is essential to Christian faith, the “one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, complete as to his Godhead, and complete as to his manhood.”<\/p>\n<p>But the creed contains not only a negative affirmation—what did <em>not<\/em> happen in the Incarnation; it also contains a positive affirmation. The union of the two natures concurs in one Person, who is the eternal Son of the Father. The union, then, of the divine and the human in Christ is a personal one; more specifically, the union is the act of the divine Person who is the Son of God. Here we approach the very heart of the mystery of the Incarnation. No one can say how the infinite God could become a finite man. Naturally, however, theologians have thought a great deal about the matter; Chalcedon does not mark the end of all inquiry.<\/p>\n<p>In theological parlance it has become customary to speak of the union of the divine and the human in the Person of the incarnate Redeemer as the “hypostatic” union <em>(unio hypostatica),<\/em> from the Greek word for “person.” It is important to note not only <em>that<\/em> the union is personal, but also <em>why<\/em> it is so. Theologians speak of the union as personal because it is the act of a Person, namely the Son of God, the Word who became flesh. This means that the Person of the incarnate Redeemer is divine, the object of Christian worship. He cannot, then, be a mere human being as other men are mere human beings. To worship one who is a man and only a man would be idolatry. And because this personal union of the divine and the human is truly a <em>union,<\/em> the Redeemer is one Person, not two. If to worship a human person would be idolatry, to worship two persons—one human, one divine—would be an absurdity. This Person, who unites in himself the divine and the human, is often described by theologians as a “theanthropic” person, the God-man. If one does not mean that he is a hybrid—half God, half man—then this mode of speaking is unobjectionable inasmuch as it simply says that this Person, Jesus Christ, is both divine and human, which is what the creed intends.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChristologyafterChalcedon\">Christology after Chalcedon<\/p>\n<p>Matters become more difficult and unanimity less in evidence, however, when the question is raised as to the personal qualities of Christ’s humanity. The formulation most consistent with Chalcedon and generally held by Protestants speaks of the “impersonal humanity” of our Lord. It has also been defended in modern times by the Swiss theologians Karl Barth and Emil Brunner and by G. C. Berkouwer of the Netherlands.<\/p>\n<p>Actually the meaning of the phrase “impersonal humanity” <em>(impersonalitas)<\/em> is not that in the case of the incarnate Son there is no manifestation of the personal at the human level. Rather, it means that this humanity, of itself, has no independent existence apart from the divine Person who assumed this humanity in the act of becoming incarnate. So far as Jesus of Nazareth is concerned, that which is human exists in and through the Word who is God himself. There is a sense in which God is present to <em>all<\/em> created reality (the doctrine of the divine immanence). But howsoever we may conceive of this divine presence of power (providence) and of grace (salvation), there can be no thought of <em>identity<\/em> between God and the creature. Even when the church, following the usage of the NT, speaks of the Christian as “indwelt by the Holy Spirit,” there is no identity of <em>being<\/em> affirmed; there is no ontological union of the human and the divine. But in the case of the man Jesus Christ, something absolutely unique is affirmed: this man is declared to be identical with God because he, the Person, is the “Word who was made flesh and dwelt among us.” “Therefore,” says Barth, “he does not only live through God and with God; he is himself God. Nor is he autonomous and self-existent. His reality, existence and being are wholly and absolutely that of God himself, the God who acts in his Word. His manhood is only the predicate of his Godhead, or better and more concretely, it is only the predicate, assumed in inconceivable condescension, of the Word acting upon us, the Word who is the Lord.”<\/p>\n<p>In other words, Jesus our Lord is, as man, so united with God that he exists as man only and insofar as he exists as God. The doctrine of <em>anhypostasy<\/em> states this truth negatively. It affirms that the human nature of our Lord does not possess the mode of its being as personal in and of itself. The doctrine of <em>enhypostasy<\/em> states this truth positively. It affirms that the particular human nature that is our Lord’s acquires its personal mode of being by union with the personal Son of God. It is not Jesus of Nazareth who becomes the Son of God (adoptionism) but the Son of God who becomes Jesus of Nazareth. The Incarnation is a unique act of a divine Person, not a unique experience of the divine on the part of a human person. The Subject of the Incarnation is a divine Subject who acts, not a human subject who is acted upon. But inasmuch as the divine Subject, the eternal Son, so acts as to become this man, Jesus of Nazareth, this man is—not just symbolizes, but <em>is<\/em>—the Son of God as no other man is or ever can be the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p>The scriptural basis of the doctrine of the Incarnation includes, of course, the entire range of data in the Gospels as well as several passages in the Pauline Epistles, especially Philippians 2:6-8, which is, perhaps, the single most important christological passage in the NT. Here Paul, using the words of a primitive Christian confession, speaks of him “who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The Chalcedonian Creed does not resolve the mystery of the Incarnation, and theologians have made many efforts to better understand the mystery. One of the best known is based on an inference drawn from the passage quoted above. It is known as <em>kenosis,<\/em> the theory that when the Son became man, he emptied himself of some aspect of his divinity. The text of Philippians does not say that he emptied himself <em>of<\/em> anything, but only that he emptied <em>himself,<\/em> a striking figure of speech denoting condescension (“made himself of no reputation,” <span>kjv<\/span>). In spite of the exegetical difficulties in this statement, kenotic theory has persisted, in one form or another, especially in British theology. Another effort at understanding suggests that our Lord’s humanity was the <em>incognito<\/em> (Kierkegaard’s term) that hid his identity as a divine person from all but the eyes of faith. Thus, the Incarnation was a revelation that veils as well as discloses the truth.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ascension of Christ; Christ; Incarnation; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven; Messiah; Parable; Son of God; Son of Man; Virgin Birth of Jesus; Word.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CHRISTOLOGY*<\/h3>\n<p>The study of the person and work of Jesus Christ. The confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God, first ventured by Peter at Caesarea Philippi (Mt 16:16), is the heart of the Christian faith. It is this confession that makes one a Christian, and all Christian theology is thinking, in the light of this confession, about the meaning of this confession. The first major theological decision of the church resulting from such believing thought was the affirmation of the essential deity of Jesus as the Son of God. As such he was declared to be of one essence with the Father and the Spirit (the dogma of the Trinity promulgated at Nicaea, <span>AD<\/span> 325). Since this affirmation was made with reference to the man Jesus of Nazareth, it forced upon the church, inescapably, the further question: How could one and the same person be both God and man? How could he who is infinite become finite; he who is eternal become temporal; he who is God become man?<\/p>\n<p>To answer this question, the church embraced the doctrine of the Incarnation. The statement of the doctrine was arrived at only after much controversy. In the course of the debate the church rejected all efforts, on the one hand, to preserve the deity of the Son at the expense of his humanity (docetism), and on the other, to preserve his humanity at the expense of his deity (adoptionism). In the former category were the doctrines of those who claimed that the Son only <em>seemed<\/em> to have a human body, or (like the Apollinarians) that while he had a true body and soul, the divine Logos took the place of the human spirit. In the latter category was the doctrine of those who claimed that the man Jesus, through the process of moral development, was elevated to divine sonship and so adopted into the Godhead. Some placed great stress on Jesus’ endowment with the Spirit at baptism as the moment of his adoption, while others, citing Acts 13:33—“today I have begotten thee”—believed Jesus became the unique Son of God at the resurrection. The church also rejected all attempts to resolve the problem of the Savior’s divinity and humanity by suggesting that he was both a divine person and a human person (Nestorianism) or, contrariwise, that the unity of his person implied a fusion of the divine and human in one nature (monophysitism).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheChalcedonianCreed\">The Chalcedonian Creed<\/p>\n<p>At the Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon (<span>AD<\/span> 451), the position was adopted that the Lord Jesus Christ was truly God and truly man <em>(vere Deo, vere homo).<\/em> The creed said:<\/p>\n<p>[He is] consubstantial with the Father as to his Godhead, and consubstantial also with us as to his manhood; like unto us in all things, yet without sin; as to his Godhead, begotten of the Father before all worlds; but as to his manhood, in these days, born for us men and for our salvation, of the virgin Mary, the mother of God, one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, only-begotten, known in two natures, without confusion, without conversion, without severance, and without division; the distinction of the natures being in no wise abolished by their union, but the peculiarity of each nature being maintained, and both concurring in one person and subsistence. We confess not a Son divided and sundered into two persons, but one and the same Son, and only-begotten, and God-Logos, our Lord Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>This confession was adopted in all its essential features by the Reformers at the time of the Protestant Reformation.<\/p>\n<p>Chalcedonian Christology does not remove the mystery of the Incarnation but rather indicates, as it were, the boundaries of believing thought about the person of the Redeemer, boundaries that have proved significant in the history of Christian thought. As for the key terms in the creed, the following should be noted: the word “nature” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">physis<\/span><em>)<\/em> as used by the church fathers does not have reference to the physical, material order that is the object of investigation by the “natural” sciences. “Nature” rather refers to being or reality in distinction from appearance. To say that Jesus Christ has a divine nature is to affirm that all the qualities, properties, or attributes by which one describes the divine order of being pertain to him. In short, he is God himself, not <em>like<\/em> God, but just <em>God.<\/em> So also with the affirmation that Christ has a human nature. Christ is not God <em>appearing<\/em> as a man; he <em>is<\/em> a man. He is not <em>only<\/em> a man nor <em>only<\/em> God; he is the God who <em>became<\/em> a man. He did not cease to be God when he became a man; he did not exchange divinity for humanity. Rather, he assumed humanity, so that he is now both divine and human. He is the God-man.<\/p>\n<p>The term “person” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">hypostasis<\/span><em>)<\/em> was used by the fathers to describe Jesus Christ as a self-conscious, self-determined Subject, one who designates himself by the word “I” over against a “thou.” The Mediator between God and man is <em>a person<\/em> who has a divine nature and a human nature. While there can be no “person” where there is no “nature,” it does not follow that there is no distinction between the terms, for there can be a “nature,” as defined above, where there is no “person.” (An object may have the properties of “nature” of a stone: grayness, hardness, roundness, smoothness. But this object, which has the “nature” of a stone, is not a “person”; it is not self-conscious and self-determined.)<\/p>\n<p>The distinction between the “person” and the “nature” of the incarnate Christ speaks of him as being a “person” with a “divine nature” and a “human nature.” The fathers were teaching through this that while we must ascribe to Christ all the qualities that belong to the divine order of being and to the human order of being (including bodily, physical, objective being—the Word “became flesh,” Jn 1:14), we cannot say that he is “two persons.” He is a divine person with a human nature, not a human person as such. All human persons have a first moment. Wheresoever and whensoever we may identify that first moment for a human “I,” whether at conception or at fetal quickening in the womb, whether at the moment of birth, or even as late as the first moment of self-awareness in the young child, no human “I” is aware of himself as a “subject,” as an “I,” before he is conceived in the womb of his mother. The man Jesus of Nazareth, however, unlike any mere man, could say, “Before Abraham was, I am” (Jn 8:58). This affirmation is neither the late theological invention of Christian fancy nor the claim of a man suffering from delusions of grandeur, but rather the sober truth. This person sitting on a mountainside preaching, this person standing by the sea calling fishermen to be his disciples, is a person who always was a person, even before there were any fishermen by the sea to call or any people to preach to on the mountainside—in fact, before there was any sea or any mountain.<\/p>\n<p>Christ is not the divine Logos, who inspires and uniquely endows the man, Jesus of Nazareth, with moral and religious insights. Rather, this man Jesus is the eternal Son of God, and God’s eternal Son has become this man, Jesus. The Son of God did not assume a man’s <em>person<\/em> to his own <em>nature,<\/em> but a man’s <em>nature<\/em> to his own <em>person.<\/em> He continues to be the same person, though he now assumes our humanity. Hence, he can speak both as a Subject consciously in history and as a Subject consciously transcending history, even in one and the same sentence. <em>“I<\/em> have glorified thee <em>on the earth: I<\/em> have finished the work which thou gavest me to do. And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which <em>I<\/em> had with thee <em>before the world was”<\/em> (Jn 17:4-5, <span>kjv<\/span>, emphasis added). Here the same person, Jesus, speaks as a person in the world, an “I” who has done certain things in the world, and as a person before there was any world, an “I” who shared his glory with a “thou” whom he calls “Father” before all time. All efforts at rational analysis of this mystery, which the church designates by the word “incarnation,” run the risk of losing the truth by explaining it. One arrives at a position in which Christ is a divine being who appears human (docetism) or a human being who either achieves divine status for himself (adoptionism) or divine worth for us (Ritschlianism).<\/p>\n<p>In order to preserve fully both our Lord’s deity and his humanity, the creed employs four terms in which we are told what did <em>not<\/em> happen in the Incarnation. The union of the two natures is declared to be “without confusion,” “without conversion,” “without separation,” and “without division.” Some have ridiculed these “four bald negatives,” but they are by no means wholly without value. Should any of these basic negatives be violated, we would lose what is essential to Christian faith, the “one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, complete as to his Godhead, and complete as to his manhood.”<\/p>\n<p>But the creed contains not only a negative affirmation—what did <em>not<\/em> happen in the Incarnation; it also contains a positive affirmation. The union of the two natures concurs in one Person, who is the eternal Son of the Father. The union, then, of the divine and the human in Christ is a personal one; more specifically, the union is the act of the divine Person who is the Son of God. Here we approach the very heart of the mystery of the Incarnation. No one can say how the infinite God could become a finite man. Naturally, however, theologians have thought a great deal about the matter; Chalcedon does not mark the end of all inquiry.<\/p>\n<p>In theological parlance it has become customary to speak of the union of the divine and the human in the Person of the incarnate Redeemer as the “hypostatic” union <em>(unio hypostatica),<\/em> from the Greek word for “person.” It is important to note not only <em>that<\/em> the union is personal, but also <em>why<\/em> it is so. Theologians speak of the union as personal because it is the act of a Person, namely the Son of God, the Word who became flesh. This means that the Person of the incarnate Redeemer is divine, the object of Christian worship. He cannot, then, be a mere human being as other men are mere human beings. To worship one who is a man and only a man would be idolatry. And because this personal union of the divine and the human is truly a <em>union,<\/em> the Redeemer is one Person, not two. If to worship a human person would be idolatry, to worship two persons—one human, one divine—would be an absurdity. This Person, who unites in himself the divine and the human, is often described by theologians as a “theanthropic” person, the God-man. If one does not mean that he is a hybrid—half God, half man—then this mode of speaking is unobjectionable inasmuch as it simply says that this Person, Jesus Christ, is both divine and human, which is what the creed intends.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChristologyafterChalcedon\">Christology after Chalcedon<\/p>\n<p>Matters become more difficult and unanimity less in evidence, however, when the question is raised as to the personal qualities of Christ’s humanity. The formulation most consistent with Chalcedon and generally held by Protestants speaks of the “impersonal humanity” of our Lord. It has also been defended in modern times by the Swiss theologians Karl Barth and Emil Brunner and by G. C. Berkouwer of the Netherlands.<\/p>\n<p>Actually the meaning of the phrase “impersonal humanity” <em>(impersonalitas)<\/em> is not that in the case of the incarnate Son there is no manifestation of the personal at the human level. Rather, it means that this humanity, of itself, has no independent existence apart from the divine Person who assumed this humanity in the act of becoming incarnate. So far as Jesus of Nazareth is concerned, that which is human exists in and through the Word who is God himself. There is a sense in which God is present to <em>all<\/em> created reality (the doctrine of the divine immanence). But howsoever we may conceive of this divine presence of power (providence) and of grace (salvation), there can be no thought of <em>identity<\/em> between God and the creature. Even when the church, following the usage of the NT, speaks of the Christian as “indwelt by the Holy Spirit,” there is no identity of <em>being<\/em> affirmed; there is no ontological union of the human and the divine. But in the case of the man Jesus Christ, something absolutely unique is affirmed: this man is declared to be identical with God because he, the Person, is the “Word who was made flesh and dwelt among us.” “Therefore,” says Barth, “he does not only live through God and with God; he is himself God. Nor is he autonomous and self-existent. His reality, existence and being are wholly and absolutely that of God himself, the God who acts in his Word. His manhood is only the predicate of his Godhead, or better and more concretely, it is only the predicate, assumed in inconceivable condescension, of the Word acting upon us, the Word who is the Lord.”<\/p>\n<p>In other words, Jesus our Lord is, as man, so united with God that he exists as man only and insofar as he exists as God. The doctrine of <em>anhypostasy<\/em> states this truth negatively. It affirms that the human nature of our Lord does not possess the mode of its being as personal in and of itself. The doctrine of <em>enhypostasy<\/em> states this truth positively. It affirms that the particular human nature that is our Lord’s acquires its personal mode of being by union with the personal Son of God. It is not Jesus of Nazareth who becomes the Son of God (adoptionism) but the Son of God who becomes Jesus of Nazareth. The Incarnation is a unique act of a divine Person, not a unique experience of the divine on the part of a human person. The Subject of the Incarnation is a divine Subject who acts, not a human subject who is acted upon. But inasmuch as the divine Subject, the eternal Son, so acts as to become this man, Jesus of Nazareth, this man is—not just symbolizes, but <em>is<\/em>—the Son of God as no other man is or ever can be the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p>The scriptural basis of the doctrine of the Incarnation includes, of course, the entire range of data in the Gospels as well as several passages in the Pauline Epistles, especially Philippians 2:6-8, which is, perhaps, the single most important christological passage in the NT. Here Paul, using the words of a primitive Christian confession, speaks of him “who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The Chalcedonian Creed does not resolve the mystery of the Incarnation, and theologians have made many efforts to better understand the mystery. One of the best known is based on an inference drawn from the passage quoted above. It is known as <em>kenosis,<\/em> the theory that when the Son became man, he emptied himself of some aspect of his divinity. The text of Philippians does not say that he emptied himself <em>of<\/em> anything, but only that he emptied <em>himself,<\/em> a striking figure of speech denoting condescension (“made himself of no reputation,” <span>kjv<\/span>). In spite of the exegetical difficulties in this statement, kenotic theory has persisted, in one form or another, especially in British theology. Another effort at understanding suggests that our Lord’s humanity was the <em>incognito<\/em> (Kierkegaard’s term) that hid his identity as a divine person from all but the eyes of faith. Thus, the Incarnation was a revelation that veils as well as discloses the truth.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ascension of Christ; Christ; Incarnation; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven; Messiah; Parable; Son of God; Son of Man; Virgin Birth of Jesus; Word.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CHRISTOLOGY* The study of the person and work of Jesus Christ. The confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God, first ventured by Peter at Caesarea Philippi (Mt 16:16), is the heart of the Christian faith. It is this confession that makes one a Christian, and all Christian theology is thinking, in the light of this confession, about the meaning of this confession. The first major theological decision of the church resulting from such believing thought was the affirmation of...","summary_en":"CHRISTOLOGY* The study of the person and work of Jesus Christ. The confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God, first ventured by Peter at Caesarea Philippi (Mt 16:16), is the heart of the Christian faith. It is this confession that makes one a Christian, and all Christian theology is thinking, in the light of this confession, about the meaning of this confession. The first major theological decision of the church resulting from such believing thought was the affirmation of...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":11845,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Faith","title_en":"Faith","content_ro":"<h3>FAITH<\/h3>\n<p>Belief in that which has no tangible proof; trust in God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DefinitionofFaith\">Definition of Faith<\/p>\n<p>In the OT and NT, “faith” carries several meanings. It may mean simple trust in God or in the Word of God, and at other times faith almost becomes equivalent to active obedience. It may also find expression in the affirmation of a creedal statement. Thus, it also comes to mean the entire body of received Christian teaching or truth—“the truth.” In Colossians 2:7, the term suggests something to be accepted as a whole and embodied in personal life. In 2 Timothy 4:7, Paul witnesses to having “kept the faith.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FaithintheOldTestament\">Faith in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT also strongly emphasizes faith as confidence in God’s covenant or in the covenant God made with Abraham and his descendants. The call of Abraham and the promise that his descendants would be used in the history of redemption became the basis of the narratives of the OT, being seen as the working out of that covenant. Once the nation Israel was brought into being, God sustained and protected it. The exodus from Egypt is a prominent indication that God was at work restoring his people to the Promised Land. The obedience of the people of God as the proper expression of faith is seen clearly in the OT. Without seeing God, his people believed and obeyed him. Abraham left his native land to go into unknown territory. The people of Israel left Egypt following the leadership of God to a land they could not see. The promise of God gave them courage to possess the land promised to them. After the exodus, the covenant of Abraham was confirmed with the people of Israel by the sprinkling of blood (Ex 24:6-7). There was to be strict obedience to God’s commands as an expression of faith. This response of human faith to the Lord’s faithfulness was national and collective. There also were commands to, and instances of, personal faith.<\/p>\n<p>Not only the narrative and legal portions of the OT but also the poetic and prophetic writings emphasize faith. The Psalms abound in expressions of personal confidence in the Lord even in dark times. Habakkuk points out that “the righteous shall live by his faith” (Hb 2:4). From such instances it is clear that, as the Lord’s education of Israel proceeded, the matter of faith in God’s faithfulness became more and more a matter of individual and personal response, and it is in the Prophets that several ingredients—such as trust, obedience, fear, and certainty—blend into the understanding of such personal faith.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FaithintheNewTestament\">Faith in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>As over against the OT, where the accent is on the faithfulness of God, in the NT the emphasis is placed on the active, responding faith of the hearer to the promised, final revelation in the Messiah, Jesus. Both verb and noun regularly describe the adequate response of people to Jesus’ word and to the gospel.<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>The most striking feature of the synoptic Gospels (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>) is the use of faith without identifying its object: “If you have faith as a grain of mustard seed” (Mt 17:20); “When Jesus saw their faith” (Mk 2:5); “Your faith has saved you” (Lk 7:50). Jesus is portrayed as one who by his work and word opens the door to faith and makes faith possible. The question is not whether the faith is in Jesus or in the Father; the implication is undoubtedly both, but as with every true bearer of the Word of God, the eye of faith is turned to the One who sends.<\/p>\n<p>On more than one occasion, Jesus denies the request for a miracle to substantiate his words (Mt 12:38-39; 16:1-4). Faith is response to the Word alone without any supporting props. No sign is to be given but the sign of Jonah. In the story of the rich man and Lazarus (Lk 16:19-31), Jesus denies the request for the spectacular and insists that the hearer must respond to the word given to him (cf. Jn 20:29). The Word demands self-surrender and commitment. Hence, the very nature of the Word and of faith becomes an obstacle to the proud and the powerful.<\/p>\n<p>Faith is the medium by which the power of God is made visible. It moves mountains, heals the sick, and is the means of entrance into the kingdom. It may be mingled with doubt, as with the father who sought healing for his son (“I believe; help my unbelief!” [Mk 9:24]), or as with John the Baptist in prison, who, even with his doubts, was confirmed by Jesus as the greatest of the offspring of woman (Mt 11:2-15). Peter’s (and the other disciples’) perception was faulty, but Jesus affirms Peter’s confession as the foundation stone of the church. The synoptic Gospels portray the early faith of the disciples in all its limitations and weaknesses, yet it is still faith in that it is their positive response to Jesus’ word and work.<\/p>\n<h5>The Fourth Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>Faith is an especially significant concept in the Gospel of John (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>), though the word (in the Greek) occurs only as a verb. Quite often the reference has to do with the acceptance that something is true, that is, simple credence, or belief: “Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father in me” (Jn 14:11); “If you believed Moses, you would believe me” (Jn 5:46).<\/p>\n<p>Even more significant is the special expression “to believe into” in the sense of putting one’s trust into another. The particular form of the expression is without parallel before the fourth Gospel and may well express the strong sense of personal trust in the eternal Word made flesh. In John 3:16, whoever puts trust in him has eternal life. Those who put their trust in him are given power to become sons of God—to be born of God (Jn 1:12). They will never thirst (6:35); they will live, even though they die (11:25).<\/p>\n<p>In other places, John speaks of trust or faith in an absolute sense, that is, without referring to the one in whom trust is placed. In John 11:15 Jesus arrives after the death of Lazarus and is glad “in order that you might believe.” The outcome is going to be faith. Similarly, in the prologue (1:7), John the Baptist bears witness in order that through him all might believe. As Jesus satisfies the doubt of Thomas concerning the resurrection, he says, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe” (20:29). In these and other passages the fundamental outcome of Jesus’ witness to himself is trust.<\/p>\n<p>Faith and knowledge are closely related. In John 6:69 Peter says, “We have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God.” In his priestly prayer Jesus says that eternal life is to “know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent” (Jn 17:3). Also, God is seen through the eyes of faith. No one has ever seen God, but the Only Begotten has revealed him (1:18). He who has seen Jesus has seen the Father (14:9).<\/p>\n<p>To believe is also expressed in the verb “receive.” Those who receive Christ are given power to become the sons of God (Jn 1:12). Trust is that form of knowing or seeing by which the glory of God (1:14; 17:4) is made present.<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>In Paul’s letters (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>), he writes about faith from a number of angles. He sets faith over against “works of the law” as the only and true basis for righteousness (Rom 1–4; Gal 1–4) and appeals to Abraham to prove his point: “Abraham believed God and it was reckoned to him for righteousness” (Gn 15:6; cf. Rom 4:5; Gal 3:6). This is entirely apart from the law (Rom 3:21); righteousness is the gift of God through faith in Christ, specifically in his atoning work. Behind Paul’s conviction lies his awareness of the radical and pervasive sinfulness of humans that renders each one helpless. Humanity is dead in sin but is made alive by faith in the word and work of Jesus mediated through the gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Faith, then, is faith in Jesus Christ. The number of metaphors Paul employs to describe the consequences of faith is staggering. It is by faith that believers are justified (Rom 5:1), reconciled (2 Cor 5:18), redeemed (Eph 1:7), made alive (2:5), adopted into the family of God (Rom 8:15-16), re-created (2 Cor 5:17), transported into a new kingdom (Col 1:13), and set free (Gal 5:1). Faith is, for Paul, the <em>sine qua non<\/em> of every aspect of salvation, from the grace that convicts to the receiving of the full inheritance at the coming of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s letters, faith is bound up with love so that the great exponent of justification by faith becomes also the articulate exponent of distinctive Christian love. To say that faith is indispensable to salvation is only part of the truth, for faith expresses itself through love: “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is of any avail, but faith working through love” (Gal 5:6); “If I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing” (1 Cor 13:2). Love is both the genesis and the ultimate expression of faith. Hence, even for Paul there can be no <em>total<\/em> separation between faith and works. This love of which Paul speaks is the essential fruit of the Spirit through whom the life of faith is lived. Only by virtue of the indwelling Spirit does faith find expression in love.<\/p>\n<h5>General Epistles<\/h5>\n<p>James speaks of faith as being completed by works (Jas 2:22). He opposed that concept of faith that thinks primarily of creedal assent, of believing that something is true without acting upon it. James, like Paul, assumes the primacy of faith, but he is warning against those who would draw wrong conclusions. Faith apart from works is not faith; it is barren (v 20). The practical dimension of faith is the burden of much of this epistle.<\/p>\n<p>The writer of Hebrews recognizes that faith has always been characteristic of the people of God and their specially called leaders. Faith makes substantial what is otherwise nebulous and uncertain; it makes evidential what is not visible. By faith the people of God have a more certain ground for their lives and their actions than the world is able to discern (Heb 11:1). The great cloud of witnesses (12:1) bear testimony by their faith to the faithfulness of God.<\/p>\n<p>Faith is opened up by the Word of God, finds expression through the Holy Spirit who is given, and bears witness to the lordship of Jesus Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FAITH<\/h3>\n<p>Belief in that which has no tangible proof; trust in God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DefinitionofFaith\">Definition of Faith<\/p>\n<p>In the OT and NT, “faith” carries several meanings. It may mean simple trust in God or in the Word of God, and at other times faith almost becomes equivalent to active obedience. It may also find expression in the affirmation of a creedal statement. Thus, it also comes to mean the entire body of received Christian teaching or truth—“the truth.” In Colossians 2:7, the term suggests something to be accepted as a whole and embodied in personal life. In 2 Timothy 4:7, Paul witnesses to having “kept the faith.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FaithintheOldTestament\">Faith in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT also strongly emphasizes faith as confidence in God’s covenant or in the covenant God made with Abraham and his descendants. The call of Abraham and the promise that his descendants would be used in the history of redemption became the basis of the narratives of the OT, being seen as the working out of that covenant. Once the nation Israel was brought into being, God sustained and protected it. The exodus from Egypt is a prominent indication that God was at work restoring his people to the Promised Land. The obedience of the people of God as the proper expression of faith is seen clearly in the OT. Without seeing God, his people believed and obeyed him. Abraham left his native land to go into unknown territory. The people of Israel left Egypt following the leadership of God to a land they could not see. The promise of God gave them courage to possess the land promised to them. After the exodus, the covenant of Abraham was confirmed with the people of Israel by the sprinkling of blood (Ex 24:6-7). There was to be strict obedience to God’s commands as an expression of faith. This response of human faith to the Lord’s faithfulness was national and collective. There also were commands to, and instances of, personal faith.<\/p>\n<p>Not only the narrative and legal portions of the OT but also the poetic and prophetic writings emphasize faith. The Psalms abound in expressions of personal confidence in the Lord even in dark times. Habakkuk points out that “the righteous shall live by his faith” (Hb 2:4). From such instances it is clear that, as the Lord’s education of Israel proceeded, the matter of faith in God’s faithfulness became more and more a matter of individual and personal response, and it is in the Prophets that several ingredients—such as trust, obedience, fear, and certainty—blend into the understanding of such personal faith.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FaithintheNewTestament\">Faith in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>As over against the OT, where the accent is on the faithfulness of God, in the NT the emphasis is placed on the active, responding faith of the hearer to the promised, final revelation in the Messiah, Jesus. Both verb and noun regularly describe the adequate response of people to Jesus’ word and to the gospel.<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>The most striking feature of the synoptic Gospels (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>) is the use of faith without identifying its object: “If you have faith as a grain of mustard seed” (Mt 17:20); “When Jesus saw their faith” (Mk 2:5); “Your faith has saved you” (Lk 7:50). Jesus is portrayed as one who by his work and word opens the door to faith and makes faith possible. The question is not whether the faith is in Jesus or in the Father; the implication is undoubtedly both, but as with every true bearer of the Word of God, the eye of faith is turned to the One who sends.<\/p>\n<p>On more than one occasion, Jesus denies the request for a miracle to substantiate his words (Mt 12:38-39; 16:1-4). Faith is response to the Word alone without any supporting props. No sign is to be given but the sign of Jonah. In the story of the rich man and Lazarus (Lk 16:19-31), Jesus denies the request for the spectacular and insists that the hearer must respond to the word given to him (cf. Jn 20:29). The Word demands self-surrender and commitment. Hence, the very nature of the Word and of faith becomes an obstacle to the proud and the powerful.<\/p>\n<p>Faith is the medium by which the power of God is made visible. It moves mountains, heals the sick, and is the means of entrance into the kingdom. It may be mingled with doubt, as with the father who sought healing for his son (“I believe; help my unbelief!” [Mk 9:24]), or as with John the Baptist in prison, who, even with his doubts, was confirmed by Jesus as the greatest of the offspring of woman (Mt 11:2-15). Peter’s (and the other disciples’) perception was faulty, but Jesus affirms Peter’s confession as the foundation stone of the church. The synoptic Gospels portray the early faith of the disciples in all its limitations and weaknesses, yet it is still faith in that it is their positive response to Jesus’ word and work.<\/p>\n<h5>The Fourth Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>Faith is an especially significant concept in the Gospel of John (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>), though the word (in the Greek) occurs only as a verb. Quite often the reference has to do with the acceptance that something is true, that is, simple credence, or belief: “Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father in me” (Jn 14:11); “If you believed Moses, you would believe me” (Jn 5:46).<\/p>\n<p>Even more significant is the special expression “to believe into” in the sense of putting one’s trust into another. The particular form of the expression is without parallel before the fourth Gospel and may well express the strong sense of personal trust in the eternal Word made flesh. In John 3:16, whoever puts trust in him has eternal life. Those who put their trust in him are given power to become sons of God—to be born of God (Jn 1:12). They will never thirst (6:35); they will live, even though they die (11:25).<\/p>\n<p>In other places, John speaks of trust or faith in an absolute sense, that is, without referring to the one in whom trust is placed. In John 11:15 Jesus arrives after the death of Lazarus and is glad “in order that you might believe.” The outcome is going to be faith. Similarly, in the prologue (1:7), John the Baptist bears witness in order that through him all might believe. As Jesus satisfies the doubt of Thomas concerning the resurrection, he says, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe” (20:29). In these and other passages the fundamental outcome of Jesus’ witness to himself is trust.<\/p>\n<p>Faith and knowledge are closely related. In John 6:69 Peter says, “We have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God.” In his priestly prayer Jesus says that eternal life is to “know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent” (Jn 17:3). Also, God is seen through the eyes of faith. No one has ever seen God, but the Only Begotten has revealed him (1:18). He who has seen Jesus has seen the Father (14:9).<\/p>\n<p>To believe is also expressed in the verb “receive.” Those who receive Christ are given power to become the sons of God (Jn 1:12). Trust is that form of knowing or seeing by which the glory of God (1:14; 17:4) is made present.<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>In Paul’s letters (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>), he writes about faith from a number of angles. He sets faith over against “works of the law” as the only and true basis for righteousness (Rom 1–4; Gal 1–4) and appeals to Abraham to prove his point: “Abraham believed God and it was reckoned to him for righteousness” (Gn 15:6; cf. Rom 4:5; Gal 3:6). This is entirely apart from the law (Rom 3:21); righteousness is the gift of God through faith in Christ, specifically in his atoning work. Behind Paul’s conviction lies his awareness of the radical and pervasive sinfulness of humans that renders each one helpless. Humanity is dead in sin but is made alive by faith in the word and work of Jesus mediated through the gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Faith, then, is faith in Jesus Christ. The number of metaphors Paul employs to describe the consequences of faith is staggering. It is by faith that believers are justified (Rom 5:1), reconciled (2 Cor 5:18), redeemed (Eph 1:7), made alive (2:5), adopted into the family of God (Rom 8:15-16), re-created (2 Cor 5:17), transported into a new kingdom (Col 1:13), and set free (Gal 5:1). Faith is, for Paul, the <em>sine qua non<\/em> of every aspect of salvation, from the grace that convicts to the receiving of the full inheritance at the coming of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s letters, faith is bound up with love so that the great exponent of justification by faith becomes also the articulate exponent of distinctive Christian love. To say that faith is indispensable to salvation is only part of the truth, for faith expresses itself through love: “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is of any avail, but faith working through love” (Gal 5:6); “If I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing” (1 Cor 13:2). Love is both the genesis and the ultimate expression of faith. Hence, even for Paul there can be no <em>total<\/em> separation between faith and works. This love of which Paul speaks is the essential fruit of the Spirit through whom the life of faith is lived. Only by virtue of the indwelling Spirit does faith find expression in love.<\/p>\n<h5>General Epistles<\/h5>\n<p>James speaks of faith as being completed by works (Jas 2:22). He opposed that concept of faith that thinks primarily of creedal assent, of believing that something is true without acting upon it. James, like Paul, assumes the primacy of faith, but he is warning against those who would draw wrong conclusions. Faith apart from works is not faith; it is barren (v 20). The practical dimension of faith is the burden of much of this epistle.<\/p>\n<p>The writer of Hebrews recognizes that faith has always been characteristic of the people of God and their specially called leaders. Faith makes substantial what is otherwise nebulous and uncertain; it makes evidential what is not visible. By faith the people of God have a more certain ground for their lives and their actions than the world is able to discern (Heb 11:1). The great cloud of witnesses (12:1) bear testimony by their faith to the faithfulness of God.<\/p>\n<p>Faith is opened up by the Word of God, finds expression through the Holy Spirit who is given, and bears witness to the lordship of Jesus Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FAITH Belief in that which has no tangible proof; trust in God. Definition of Faith In the OT and NT, “faith” carries several meanings. It may mean simple trust in God or in the Word of God, and at other times faith almost becomes equivalent to active obedience. It may also find expression in the affirmation of a creedal statement. Thus, it also comes to mean the entire body of received Christian teaching or truth—“the truth.” In Colossians 2:7, the term suggests something to be accepted as a...","summary_en":"FAITH Belief in that which has no tangible proof; trust in God. Definition of Faith In the OT and NT, “faith” carries several meanings. It may mean simple trust in God or in the Word of God, and at other times faith almost becomes equivalent to active obedience. It may also find expression in the affirmation of a creedal statement. Thus, it also comes to mean the entire body of received Christian teaching or truth—“the truth.” In Colossians 2:7, the term suggests something to be accepted as a...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":12410,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Flesh","title_en":"Flesh","content_ro":"<h3>FLESH<\/h3>\n<p>The body; the physical being of humans; the human person and human existence; the carnal nature of humans.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Term commonly used to designate the material stuff of the body, whether of people (Gn 40:19) or of animals (Lv 6:27). However, “flesh” is used in the OT with a variety of meanings. Sometimes it is used as equivalent for the whole body (Prv 14:30), and the meaning is extended to designate the whole person (“my flesh also shall rest in hope,” Ps 16:9, <span>kjv<\/span>). This idea leads to the union of two different persons, man and wife as “one flesh” (Gn 2:24), and a man can say of his relatives, “I am your bone and your flesh” (Jgs 9:2). The idea of flesh as the whole person leads to the expression “all flesh,” denoting the totality of humankind, sometimes including also the animal world.<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps the most distinctive use of “flesh” in the OT is found in those passages where it designates human weakness and frailty over against God. “My spirit shall not abide in man for ever, for he is flesh” (Gn 6:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). In Psalm 78:39, God attributes sin to the fact that men are but flesh. In 2 Chronicles 32:8 the arm of flesh of the king of Assyria (i.e., his weakness) is contrasted with the all-powerful God. The one who puts trust in God need not fear what “flesh” can do (Ps 56:4), but the one who puts trust in human flesh instead of in God is under a curse (Jer 17:5). In Isaiah 31:3 flesh is contrasted with spirit, as weakness is with strength.<\/p>\n<p>However, nowhere in the OT is flesh viewed as sinful. Flesh is conceived as being created by God of the dust of the earth (Gn 2:7), and as God’s creation, it is good.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Paul ascribes many—often unique—definitions to the word “flesh” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sarx<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Flesh as the Stuff of the Body<\/h5>\n<p>“Flesh” is frequently used to describe the tissues that constitute the body. There are different kinds of flesh—“of men,” “of animals,” “of birds,” “of fish” (1 Cor 15:39). Pain and suffering may be experienced in the flesh (2 Cor 12:7). Circumcision is done in the flesh (Rom 2:28). While “flesh” in such references is not sinful, it is corruptible and cannot inherit the kingdom of God (1 Cor 15:50). Jesus’ body was also a body of flesh (Col 1:22).<\/p>\n<h5>Flesh as the Body Itself<\/h5>\n<p>By a natural transition, the part is used for the whole, and in many places “flesh” is synonymous with the body as a whole rather than designating the fleshy part of the body. Paul may thus speak either of being absent in the body (1 Cor 5:3) or in the flesh (Col 2:5). Paul can say that the life of Jesus may be manifested in our body or in our mortal flesh (2 Cor 4:10-11). “He who joins himself to a prostitute becomes one body with her. For, as it is written, ‘The two shall become one flesh’ ” (1 Cor 6:16, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Flesh as Person with Reference to Origin<\/h5>\n<p>Following OT usage, “flesh” was used by Paul to refer not merely to the stuff of the body or to the body itself, but concretely to the person as constituted by flesh. In this usage the word may refer to the person’s human relationship, the physical origin and the natural ties that bind one to other humans. Paul speaks of his kinsmen “according to the flesh,” his fellow Jews (Rom 9:3, <span>kjv<\/span>), and even uses “my flesh” (11:14, <span>kjv<\/span>) as a synonym for these kinsmen. The “children of the flesh” (9:8) are those born by natural generation in contrast to those born as a result of divine intervention. Christ was descended from David according to the flesh (1:3). The phrase does not designate the source merely of his bodily life but of his entire human existence, including both his body and his human spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Flesh as Human Existence<\/h5>\n<p>Another use of “flesh” simply designates human existence. As long as a person lives in the body, that one is “in the flesh.” Thus, Paul can speak of the life that he lives “in the flesh” as lived by faith in the Son of God (Gal 2:20, <span>rsv<\/span>). Referring to Jesus’ earthly ministry, Paul says that he abolished “in the flesh” the enmity between Jew and Gentile (Eph 2:15). Peter has the same meaning when he speaks of Jesus having been put to death “in the flesh” (1 Pt 3:18). So also John: “Jesus Christ is come in the flesh” (1 Jn 4:2). This usage is reflected most notably in the Johannine saying “The Word became flesh and dwelt among us” (Jn 1:14).<\/p>\n<h5>Flesh as Human Existence in Terms of Outward Presentation<\/h5>\n<p>“Flesh” also extends beyond humans in their bodily life to include other factors crucial to human existence. Thus, “confidence in the flesh” (Phil 3:3, <span>rsv<\/span>) does not mean confidence in the body but confidence in the whole complex of the outward realm of human existence. It includes Paul’s Jewish ancestry, his strict religious training, his zeal, and his prominence in Jewish religious circles. The phrase to “glory after the flesh” (2 Cor 11:18, <span>kjv<\/span>) is rendered “boast about their human achievements” in the <span>nlt<\/span>. A good showing “in the flesh” is practically synonymous with worldly prominence (Gal 6:11-14). The Judaizers insisted upon circumcision to promote a sense of prideful attainment in the religious life so that they might have a ground of glorying. But these external distinctions and grounds for glorying no longer appealed to Paul, because the world had been crucified to him and he to the world.<\/p>\n<p>“Flesh” is also used of outward relationships, as when describing the social ties existing between slave and master (Eph 6:5; Col 3:22; Phlm 1:16). “In the flesh” also describes the realm of marital relationships, which entails certain troublesome problems (1 Cor 7:28).<\/p>\n<p>This usage illuminates an otherwise difficult saying, “Henceforth know we no man after the flesh; yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more” (2 Cor 5:16, <span>kjv<\/span>). The <span>rsv<\/span> correctly renders the phrase “from a human point of view.” The verse does not mean that Paul had heard and seen Jesus in Jerusalem at some previous time and had gained some acquaintance with Christ “after the flesh.” “After the flesh” modifies the verb “to know,” not the noun “Christ.” Before his conversion, Paul knew all people “after the flesh”; that is, he judged them by worldly, human standards. To know Christ “after the flesh” means to look at him through merely human eyes. As a Jew, Paul had felt that Jesus was a deluded messianic pretender. According to the Jewish understanding, the Messiah was to reign over the earth as a Davidic king, save his people Israel, and punish the hated Gentiles. But Paul surrendered this false human view and came to know Christ as he really is—the incarnate Son of God, the Savior of all who believe. As a Christian, Paul no longer judged others according to the flesh.<\/p>\n<h5>Flesh as Fallen Humanity<\/h5>\n<p>When Paul says that “flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Cor 15:50, <span>rsv<\/span>), he does not mean that humans cannot inherit the kingdom of God but rather that human fallenness cannot; as the next clause shows, “neither does corruption inherit incorruption.” The weak, fallen, corruptible body cannot inherit the kingdom of God; there must be a change; the “corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality” (1 Cor 15:53, <span>kjv<\/span>). This is not the salvation of the soul or spirit but the exchange of one kind of body for another that is suited to the final glorious kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>When Peter confessed the messiahship of Jesus, Jesus replied, “Flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17, <span>rsv<\/span>). The meaning of this verse is obvious. This knowledge of Jesus’ messiahship was not a human deduction; it could be achieved only by divine revelation.<\/p>\n<h5>Flesh as Sinful Humanity<\/h5>\n<p>There remains a group of ethical references that are distinctly Pauline. The most important feature of this usage is that man is seen not only as fallen and weak before God, but as fallen and sinful. Flesh is contrasted with human spirit regenerated by the divine Spirit, and without the aid of the Spirit, one cannot please God. The most vivid passage is the first part of Romans 8, where Paul sharply contrasts those who are “in the flesh” with those who are “in the Spirit.” To be “in the Spirit” in this sense does not mean to be in a state of ecstasy but to be living one’s life in that spiritual realm that is controlled by the Spirit of God. Those who are “in the flesh,” that is, unregenerate, cannot please God. There are two contrasting and mutually exclusive realms: “in the flesh” and “in the Spirit.” To be “in the Spirit” means to be indwelt by God’s Holy Spirit, that is, to be a regenerate person.<\/p>\n<p>In Romans 7–8 Paul makes it clear that the unregenerate person cannot please God by loving and serving him as God requires. Thus, the Law was unable to make mankind truly righteous, because the flesh is weak (8:2). To live after the flesh is death; to live after the Spirit is life (8:6). Elsewhere Paul says, “For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing” (7:18, <span>kjv<\/span>). Flesh here cannot be the physical flesh, for the body of flesh is the temple of the Spirit (1 Cor 6:19) and a member of Christ (6:15) and is to be the means of glorifying God (6:20). Paul, therefore, means that in his unregenerate nature there dwells none of the goodness that God demands.<\/p>\n<p>While Paul makes a sharp and absolute contrast between being “in the flesh” (unregenerate) and “in the Spirit” (regenerate), when one becomes regenerate and comes to be “in the Spirit,” that person is no longer in the flesh, but the flesh is still in him. In fact, there remains in the believer a struggle between the flesh and the Spirit. Writing to people who are “in the Spirit,” Paul says, “For the flesh lusteth [strives] against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would” (Gal 5:17, <span>kjv<\/span>). Because the Christian life is the battleground of these two opposing principles, it is impossible to be the perfect person that one would wish to be.<\/p>\n<p>The same situation is reflected in 1 Corinthians 2:14–3:3 where Paul describes three classes of people: the “natural” (2:14, <span>kjv<\/span>); the “carnal,” that is, fleshly man (3:1, 3, <span>kjv<\/span>); and the “spiritual man” (3:1, <span>kjv<\/span>). The “natural man” is unregenerate. Those who are “in the flesh” (Rom 8:9) have devoted the whole of their life to the human level and hence are unable to know the things of God. “Spiritual man” refers to those whose life is ruled by the Spirit of God, so that the fruits of the Spirit (Gal 5:22-23) are evident in their life. Between these two there is a third class—those who are “fleshly” yet who are babes in Christ. Therefore, they must be “in the Spirit,” yet they do not walk “according to the Spirit.” Because they are “babes in Christ,” the Spirit of God dwells in them, yet the Holy Spirit is not allowed to have full control over them, and they are still walking “like men” (1 Cor 3:3), manifesting the works of the flesh in jealousy and strife.<\/p>\n<h5>Works of the Flesh<\/h5>\n<p>In Galatians 5:19-23 Paul contrasts the life in the flesh and the life in the Spirit: “Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these: adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like” (Gal 5:19-21, <span>kjv<\/span>). The important thing to note about this list is that while some of these are sins of bodily and sexual appetite, others are religious sins—idolatry, witchcraft—and several are sins “of the spirit,” that is, of the disposition—hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife. The words “seditions” and “heresies” refer not to theological heresies but to a factious, divisive spirit. This proves conclusively that for Paul the “flesh” is not synonymous with the body but includes the whole person, with all the inner attitudes and disposition.<\/p>\n<h5>Victory over the Flesh<\/h5>\n<p>While a struggle remains in the Christian between the Spirit and the flesh, Paul knows of a way of victory for the Spirit. The flesh of the body comes within the sphere of sanctification (1 Thes 5:23), but the flesh as the unregenerate human nature can only be put to death.<\/p>\n<p>This is called the tension between the objective and the subjective. Because certain things have happened in Christ (objective), certain inevitable results should accrue (subjective). In Paul’s view, the flesh has already been put to death in the death of Christ. Those who belong to Christ have already crucified the flesh with its passions and desires (Gal 5:24). Paul elsewhere says, “I have been crucified with Christ” (2:20) and “our old self was crucified with him” (Rom 6:6). Such references make it clear that “flesh” and the “self” are in some ways to be identified. This identity is further supported in the teaching about crucifixion, for Paul means the same thing by the crucifixion of the flesh that he means when he says, “How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? We were baptized into his death. We are buried with him by baptism into death” (vv 1-4). It is I myself who have died with Christ.<\/p>\n<p>This crucifixion and death of the flesh does not, however, work automatically. It is an event that must be appropriated by faith. This involves two aspects. First, believers are to recognize that the flesh has been crucified with Christ. “Reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord” (Rom 6:11, <span>kjv<\/span>). One cannot consider the self dead with Christ to sin unless that person has actually died and been crucified with Christ, but because this has already happened at the moment of saving faith, it can be put into daily practice. Those who have died with Christ are to “mortify [put to death] the deeds of the body” (8:13, <span>kjv<\/span>). “Body” is here used as a vehicle for the works of the “flesh”—the sensual life of the unregenerate nature. Those who have been brought from death into life are to yield their members to God as instruments of righteousness (6:13). One who has died with Christ is to “mortify” (<span>kjv<\/span>), that is, put to death what is earthly—fornication, uncleanness, covetousness (Col 3:5). Having already put off the old nature and put on the new, the believer is to put on compassion, kindness, lowliness and the like.<\/p>\n<p>Victory over the flesh is sometimes described as walking in the Spirit. “Walk by the Spirit, and do not gratify the desires of the flesh” (Gal 5:16, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Rom 8:4). Walking in the Spirit means to live each moment under the control of the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Body; Sin.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FLESH<\/h3>\n<p>The body; the physical being of humans; the human person and human existence; the carnal nature of humans.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Term commonly used to designate the material stuff of the body, whether of people (Gn 40:19) or of animals (Lv 6:27). However, “flesh” is used in the OT with a variety of meanings. Sometimes it is used as equivalent for the whole body (Prv 14:30), and the meaning is extended to designate the whole person (“my flesh also shall rest in hope,” Ps 16:9, <span>kjv<\/span>). This idea leads to the union of two different persons, man and wife as “one flesh” (Gn 2:24), and a man can say of his relatives, “I am your bone and your flesh” (Jgs 9:2). The idea of flesh as the whole person leads to the expression “all flesh,” denoting the totality of humankind, sometimes including also the animal world.<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps the most distinctive use of “flesh” in the OT is found in those passages where it designates human weakness and frailty over against God. “My spirit shall not abide in man for ever, for he is flesh” (Gn 6:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). In Psalm 78:39, God attributes sin to the fact that men are but flesh. In 2 Chronicles 32:8 the arm of flesh of the king of Assyria (i.e., his weakness) is contrasted with the all-powerful God. The one who puts trust in God need not fear what “flesh” can do (Ps 56:4), but the one who puts trust in human flesh instead of in God is under a curse (Jer 17:5). In Isaiah 31:3 flesh is contrasted with spirit, as weakness is with strength.<\/p>\n<p>However, nowhere in the OT is flesh viewed as sinful. Flesh is conceived as being created by God of the dust of the earth (Gn 2:7), and as God’s creation, it is good.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Paul ascribes many—often unique—definitions to the word “flesh” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sarx<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Flesh as the Stuff of the Body<\/h5>\n<p>“Flesh” is frequently used to describe the tissues that constitute the body. There are different kinds of flesh—“of men,” “of animals,” “of birds,” “of fish” (1 Cor 15:39). Pain and suffering may be experienced in the flesh (2 Cor 12:7). Circumcision is done in the flesh (Rom 2:28). While “flesh” in such references is not sinful, it is corruptible and cannot inherit the kingdom of God (1 Cor 15:50). Jesus’ body was also a body of flesh (Col 1:22).<\/p>\n<h5>Flesh as the Body Itself<\/h5>\n<p>By a natural transition, the part is used for the whole, and in many places “flesh” is synonymous with the body as a whole rather than designating the fleshy part of the body. Paul may thus speak either of being absent in the body (1 Cor 5:3) or in the flesh (Col 2:5). Paul can say that the life of Jesus may be manifested in our body or in our mortal flesh (2 Cor 4:10-11). “He who joins himself to a prostitute becomes one body with her. For, as it is written, ‘The two shall become one flesh’ ” (1 Cor 6:16, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Flesh as Person with Reference to Origin<\/h5>\n<p>Following OT usage, “flesh” was used by Paul to refer not merely to the stuff of the body or to the body itself, but concretely to the person as constituted by flesh. In this usage the word may refer to the person’s human relationship, the physical origin and the natural ties that bind one to other humans. Paul speaks of his kinsmen “according to the flesh,” his fellow Jews (Rom 9:3, <span>kjv<\/span>), and even uses “my flesh” (11:14, <span>kjv<\/span>) as a synonym for these kinsmen. The “children of the flesh” (9:8) are those born by natural generation in contrast to those born as a result of divine intervention. Christ was descended from David according to the flesh (1:3). The phrase does not designate the source merely of his bodily life but of his entire human existence, including both his body and his human spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Flesh as Human Existence<\/h5>\n<p>Another use of “flesh” simply designates human existence. As long as a person lives in the body, that one is “in the flesh.” Thus, Paul can speak of the life that he lives “in the flesh” as lived by faith in the Son of God (Gal 2:20, <span>rsv<\/span>). Referring to Jesus’ earthly ministry, Paul says that he abolished “in the flesh” the enmity between Jew and Gentile (Eph 2:15). Peter has the same meaning when he speaks of Jesus having been put to death “in the flesh” (1 Pt 3:18). So also John: “Jesus Christ is come in the flesh” (1 Jn 4:2). This usage is reflected most notably in the Johannine saying “The Word became flesh and dwelt among us” (Jn 1:14).<\/p>\n<h5>Flesh as Human Existence in Terms of Outward Presentation<\/h5>\n<p>“Flesh” also extends beyond humans in their bodily life to include other factors crucial to human existence. Thus, “confidence in the flesh” (Phil 3:3, <span>rsv<\/span>) does not mean confidence in the body but confidence in the whole complex of the outward realm of human existence. It includes Paul’s Jewish ancestry, his strict religious training, his zeal, and his prominence in Jewish religious circles. The phrase to “glory after the flesh” (2 Cor 11:18, <span>kjv<\/span>) is rendered “boast about their human achievements” in the <span>nlt<\/span>. A good showing “in the flesh” is practically synonymous with worldly prominence (Gal 6:11-14). The Judaizers insisted upon circumcision to promote a sense of prideful attainment in the religious life so that they might have a ground of glorying. But these external distinctions and grounds for glorying no longer appealed to Paul, because the world had been crucified to him and he to the world.<\/p>\n<p>“Flesh” is also used of outward relationships, as when describing the social ties existing between slave and master (Eph 6:5; Col 3:22; Phlm 1:16). “In the flesh” also describes the realm of marital relationships, which entails certain troublesome problems (1 Cor 7:28).<\/p>\n<p>This usage illuminates an otherwise difficult saying, “Henceforth know we no man after the flesh; yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more” (2 Cor 5:16, <span>kjv<\/span>). The <span>rsv<\/span> correctly renders the phrase “from a human point of view.” The verse does not mean that Paul had heard and seen Jesus in Jerusalem at some previous time and had gained some acquaintance with Christ “after the flesh.” “After the flesh” modifies the verb “to know,” not the noun “Christ.” Before his conversion, Paul knew all people “after the flesh”; that is, he judged them by worldly, human standards. To know Christ “after the flesh” means to look at him through merely human eyes. As a Jew, Paul had felt that Jesus was a deluded messianic pretender. According to the Jewish understanding, the Messiah was to reign over the earth as a Davidic king, save his people Israel, and punish the hated Gentiles. But Paul surrendered this false human view and came to know Christ as he really is—the incarnate Son of God, the Savior of all who believe. As a Christian, Paul no longer judged others according to the flesh.<\/p>\n<h5>Flesh as Fallen Humanity<\/h5>\n<p>When Paul says that “flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Cor 15:50, <span>rsv<\/span>), he does not mean that humans cannot inherit the kingdom of God but rather that human fallenness cannot; as the next clause shows, “neither does corruption inherit incorruption.” The weak, fallen, corruptible body cannot inherit the kingdom of God; there must be a change; the “corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality” (1 Cor 15:53, <span>kjv<\/span>). This is not the salvation of the soul or spirit but the exchange of one kind of body for another that is suited to the final glorious kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>When Peter confessed the messiahship of Jesus, Jesus replied, “Flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17, <span>rsv<\/span>). The meaning of this verse is obvious. This knowledge of Jesus’ messiahship was not a human deduction; it could be achieved only by divine revelation.<\/p>\n<h5>Flesh as Sinful Humanity<\/h5>\n<p>There remains a group of ethical references that are distinctly Pauline. The most important feature of this usage is that man is seen not only as fallen and weak before God, but as fallen and sinful. Flesh is contrasted with human spirit regenerated by the divine Spirit, and without the aid of the Spirit, one cannot please God. The most vivid passage is the first part of Romans 8, where Paul sharply contrasts those who are “in the flesh” with those who are “in the Spirit.” To be “in the Spirit” in this sense does not mean to be in a state of ecstasy but to be living one’s life in that spiritual realm that is controlled by the Spirit of God. Those who are “in the flesh,” that is, unregenerate, cannot please God. There are two contrasting and mutually exclusive realms: “in the flesh” and “in the Spirit.” To be “in the Spirit” means to be indwelt by God’s Holy Spirit, that is, to be a regenerate person.<\/p>\n<p>In Romans 7–8 Paul makes it clear that the unregenerate person cannot please God by loving and serving him as God requires. Thus, the Law was unable to make mankind truly righteous, because the flesh is weak (8:2). To live after the flesh is death; to live after the Spirit is life (8:6). Elsewhere Paul says, “For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing” (7:18, <span>kjv<\/span>). Flesh here cannot be the physical flesh, for the body of flesh is the temple of the Spirit (1 Cor 6:19) and a member of Christ (6:15) and is to be the means of glorifying God (6:20). Paul, therefore, means that in his unregenerate nature there dwells none of the goodness that God demands.<\/p>\n<p>While Paul makes a sharp and absolute contrast between being “in the flesh” (unregenerate) and “in the Spirit” (regenerate), when one becomes regenerate and comes to be “in the Spirit,” that person is no longer in the flesh, but the flesh is still in him. In fact, there remains in the believer a struggle between the flesh and the Spirit. Writing to people who are “in the Spirit,” Paul says, “For the flesh lusteth [strives] against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would” (Gal 5:17, <span>kjv<\/span>). Because the Christian life is the battleground of these two opposing principles, it is impossible to be the perfect person that one would wish to be.<\/p>\n<p>The same situation is reflected in 1 Corinthians 2:14–3:3 where Paul describes three classes of people: the “natural” (2:14, <span>kjv<\/span>); the “carnal,” that is, fleshly man (3:1, 3, <span>kjv<\/span>); and the “spiritual man” (3:1, <span>kjv<\/span>). The “natural man” is unregenerate. Those who are “in the flesh” (Rom 8:9) have devoted the whole of their life to the human level and hence are unable to know the things of God. “Spiritual man” refers to those whose life is ruled by the Spirit of God, so that the fruits of the Spirit (Gal 5:22-23) are evident in their life. Between these two there is a third class—those who are “fleshly” yet who are babes in Christ. Therefore, they must be “in the Spirit,” yet they do not walk “according to the Spirit.” Because they are “babes in Christ,” the Spirit of God dwells in them, yet the Holy Spirit is not allowed to have full control over them, and they are still walking “like men” (1 Cor 3:3), manifesting the works of the flesh in jealousy and strife.<\/p>\n<h5>Works of the Flesh<\/h5>\n<p>In Galatians 5:19-23 Paul contrasts the life in the flesh and the life in the Spirit: “Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these: adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like” (Gal 5:19-21, <span>kjv<\/span>). The important thing to note about this list is that while some of these are sins of bodily and sexual appetite, others are religious sins—idolatry, witchcraft—and several are sins “of the spirit,” that is, of the disposition—hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife. The words “seditions” and “heresies” refer not to theological heresies but to a factious, divisive spirit. This proves conclusively that for Paul the “flesh” is not synonymous with the body but includes the whole person, with all the inner attitudes and disposition.<\/p>\n<h5>Victory over the Flesh<\/h5>\n<p>While a struggle remains in the Christian between the Spirit and the flesh, Paul knows of a way of victory for the Spirit. The flesh of the body comes within the sphere of sanctification (1 Thes 5:23), but the flesh as the unregenerate human nature can only be put to death.<\/p>\n<p>This is called the tension between the objective and the subjective. Because certain things have happened in Christ (objective), certain inevitable results should accrue (subjective). In Paul’s view, the flesh has already been put to death in the death of Christ. Those who belong to Christ have already crucified the flesh with its passions and desires (Gal 5:24). Paul elsewhere says, “I have been crucified with Christ” (2:20) and “our old self was crucified with him” (Rom 6:6). Such references make it clear that “flesh” and the “self” are in some ways to be identified. This identity is further supported in the teaching about crucifixion, for Paul means the same thing by the crucifixion of the flesh that he means when he says, “How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? We were baptized into his death. We are buried with him by baptism into death” (vv 1-4). It is I myself who have died with Christ.<\/p>\n<p>This crucifixion and death of the flesh does not, however, work automatically. It is an event that must be appropriated by faith. This involves two aspects. First, believers are to recognize that the flesh has been crucified with Christ. “Reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord” (Rom 6:11, <span>kjv<\/span>). One cannot consider the self dead with Christ to sin unless that person has actually died and been crucified with Christ, but because this has already happened at the moment of saving faith, it can be put into daily practice. Those who have died with Christ are to “mortify [put to death] the deeds of the body” (8:13, <span>kjv<\/span>). “Body” is here used as a vehicle for the works of the “flesh”—the sensual life of the unregenerate nature. Those who have been brought from death into life are to yield their members to God as instruments of righteousness (6:13). One who has died with Christ is to “mortify” (<span>kjv<\/span>), that is, put to death what is earthly—fornication, uncleanness, covetousness (Col 3:5). Having already put off the old nature and put on the new, the believer is to put on compassion, kindness, lowliness and the like.<\/p>\n<p>Victory over the flesh is sometimes described as walking in the Spirit. “Walk by the Spirit, and do not gratify the desires of the flesh” (Gal 5:16, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Rom 8:4). Walking in the Spirit means to live each moment under the control of the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Body; Sin.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FLESH The body; the physical being of humans; the human person and human existence; the carnal nature of humans. In the Old Testament Term commonly used to designate the material stuff of the body, whether of people (Gn 40:19) or of animals (Lv 6:27). However, “flesh” is used in the OT with a variety of meanings. Sometimes it is used as equivalent for the whole body (Prv 14:30), and the meaning is extended to designate the whole person (“my flesh also shall rest in hope,” Ps 16:9, kjv). This ...","summary_en":"FLESH The body; the physical being of humans; the human person and human existence; the carnal nature of humans. In the Old Testament Term commonly used to designate the material stuff of the body, whether of people (Gn 40:19) or of animals (Lv 6:27). However, “flesh” is used in the OT with a variety of meanings. Sometimes it is used as equivalent for the whole body (Prv 14:30), and the meaning is extended to designate the whole person (“my flesh also shall rest in hope,” Ps 16:9, kjv). This ...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":12881,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Fullness","title_en":"Fullness","content_ro":"<h3>FULLNESS<\/h3>\n<p>Common translation of the Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">pleroma<\/span><em>.<\/em> The word carries various shades of meaning that must be determined by observing its use in context.<\/p>\n<h4>General Usage<\/h4>\n<p>In Greek usage outside the NT, the word means “that which fills.” It is found in reference to the cargo or crew that fills a ship, the people that make up a crowd, and the years that fill a person’s life. The philosopher Aristotle used the term to denote the population that fills a city. That sense is used in Matthew’s and Mark’s Gospels of a patch that fills up a hole in an old garment (Mt 9:16; Mk 2:21), and in Mark of the pieces of fish that fill a basket (Mk 6:43; 8:20).<\/p>\n<h4>“Earth” Expressions<\/h4>\n<p>In several instances in the <span>kjv<\/span> the term is found in the phrase “the earth and its fullness” (Pss 24:1; 50:12; 89:11; 1 Cor 10:26) or “the sea and its fullness” (1 Chr 16:32; Ps 96:11-12), meaning “contents.” Beyond its obvious quantitative sense, the meaning in these expressions may reflect a qualitative character: the contents of the earth are good and special. The Hebrew mind viewed the created order as a reflection of the Creator (Pss 8:5-6; 19:1-6; Jer 23:24). Accordingly, whenever people entered into relationship with anything God had created, whether in work or meals or relationships, they also entered objectively into relationship with God, who had given those things. Thus, the Jews heard with horror the prophetic announcement of God’s intention to bring destruction upon “the land and all that fills it” (Jer 8:16; 47:2; Ez 12:19; 19:7; 30:12).<\/p>\n<h4>The Apostle Paul’s Usage<\/h4>\n<p>The origin of Paul’s understanding and use of “fullness” as a significant theological term has been debated. It is held by some that the word was a technical term used by the Gnostics in reference to a realm of spiritual beings that bridged the space between the true God and an “evil” earth. Subsequently, false teachers came to view Christ as one among many deities who lived in that “fullness.” In order to correct the misunderstanding, Paul borrowed the term from his opponents and applied it to Christ. Jesus is not just one of the beings between God and humanity, Paul taught; rather, he is all there is (“the fullness”) between God and humanity (Col 1:15-20).<\/p>\n<p>Against that view it is argued that Paul used the term in several contexts where that interpretation is obviously inadequate (Rom 13:10; Eph 1:22-23). In addition, it is likely that Paul, with his Pharisaic Jewish background, would understand the term in light of its OT usage. Thus, Paul’s use of the term may be better understood as not borrowed from his opponents.<\/p>\n<p>Paul used the term four times in the book of Romans. It can be rendered “full inclusion” in reference to the total number of Jews (Rom 11:12) or Gentiles (v 25) who will come to God. In verse 12, however, the term is set in opposition to the “failure” and “trespass” of the Jews, who feel that righteousness is a matter of their Jewish heritage rather than faith. It may be that Paul used the term in reference to “complete obedience to God’s will.” Thus, in essence Paul said, “If their disobedience means this much good for the world, think of what their obedience will mean.” It is in this active sense that “fullness” is used in Romans 13:10. Love brings to realization all that the law intends. Similarly, Paul desires that his own life be a full expression of the gospel of Christ (15:29).<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Ephesians, the church is referred to as the “fullness of Christ” (Eph 1:22-23; 4:13), and “the fullness of God” (3:19). A variety of interpretations have been offered for this phrase: the church is filled, made complete or whole by Christ; the church possesses the attributes of Christ; the church is the agent through which Christ does all his work. The church is full of Christ in that it is the complete, continuing expression of his words and works (compare Col 2:10). In the book of Colossians, Paul used the term in reference to Christ; in him dwells the “fullness of God” (1:19; 2:9). These passages are often interpreted as proclaiming the equality of Christ with God. All of God’s attributes are contained in Christ. All that God is, Christ is.<\/p>\n<h4>The Apostle John’s Usage<\/h4>\n<p>The prologue to John’s Gospel states that the “fullness of Christ” is received by all believers (1:16). The exact nature of this fullness is defined in verse 14: “And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth.” The Greek word for “fullness” here indicates plenitude and totality. The Gnostics used the word to describe the totality of all deities. John, as with Paul, used the word to describe Christ as the fullness, the plenitude of God, for all the fullness of the Godhead dwells in him bodily (see Col 1:19; 2:9).<\/p>\n<p>Since all of God’s fullness dwells in Christ, every spiritual reality is found in Christ. In Christ, believers lack nothing. Of course, no single believer could receive all that Christ is; it takes the body of Christ to appropriate Christ’s fullness and to express it (Eph 1:23). Nevertheless, each believer receives in measure the same content of that fullness. Christ is continually full; he never is depleted. No matter how much the believers receive of him, he keeps on giving. Believers do not need to seek any other source but Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FULLNESS<\/h3>\n<p>Common translation of the Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">pleroma<\/span><em>.<\/em> The word carries various shades of meaning that must be determined by observing its use in context.<\/p>\n<h4>General Usage<\/h4>\n<p>In Greek usage outside the NT, the word means “that which fills.” It is found in reference to the cargo or crew that fills a ship, the people that make up a crowd, and the years that fill a person’s life. The philosopher Aristotle used the term to denote the population that fills a city. That sense is used in Matthew’s and Mark’s Gospels of a patch that fills up a hole in an old garment (Mt 9:16; Mk 2:21), and in Mark of the pieces of fish that fill a basket (Mk 6:43; 8:20).<\/p>\n<h4>“Earth” Expressions<\/h4>\n<p>In several instances in the <span>kjv<\/span> the term is found in the phrase “the earth and its fullness” (Pss 24:1; 50:12; 89:11; 1 Cor 10:26) or “the sea and its fullness” (1 Chr 16:32; Ps 96:11-12), meaning “contents.” Beyond its obvious quantitative sense, the meaning in these expressions may reflect a qualitative character: the contents of the earth are good and special. The Hebrew mind viewed the created order as a reflection of the Creator (Pss 8:5-6; 19:1-6; Jer 23:24). Accordingly, whenever people entered into relationship with anything God had created, whether in work or meals or relationships, they also entered objectively into relationship with God, who had given those things. Thus, the Jews heard with horror the prophetic announcement of God’s intention to bring destruction upon “the land and all that fills it” (Jer 8:16; 47:2; Ez 12:19; 19:7; 30:12).<\/p>\n<h4>The Apostle Paul’s Usage<\/h4>\n<p>The origin of Paul’s understanding and use of “fullness” as a significant theological term has been debated. It is held by some that the word was a technical term used by the Gnostics in reference to a realm of spiritual beings that bridged the space between the true God and an “evil” earth. Subsequently, false teachers came to view Christ as one among many deities who lived in that “fullness.” In order to correct the misunderstanding, Paul borrowed the term from his opponents and applied it to Christ. Jesus is not just one of the beings between God and humanity, Paul taught; rather, he is all there is (“the fullness”) between God and humanity (Col 1:15-20).<\/p>\n<p>Against that view it is argued that Paul used the term in several contexts where that interpretation is obviously inadequate (Rom 13:10; Eph 1:22-23). In addition, it is likely that Paul, with his Pharisaic Jewish background, would understand the term in light of its OT usage. Thus, Paul’s use of the term may be better understood as not borrowed from his opponents.<\/p>\n<p>Paul used the term four times in the book of Romans. It can be rendered “full inclusion” in reference to the total number of Jews (Rom 11:12) or Gentiles (v 25) who will come to God. In verse 12, however, the term is set in opposition to the “failure” and “trespass” of the Jews, who feel that righteousness is a matter of their Jewish heritage rather than faith. It may be that Paul used the term in reference to “complete obedience to God’s will.” Thus, in essence Paul said, “If their disobedience means this much good for the world, think of what their obedience will mean.” It is in this active sense that “fullness” is used in Romans 13:10. Love brings to realization all that the law intends. Similarly, Paul desires that his own life be a full expression of the gospel of Christ (15:29).<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Ephesians, the church is referred to as the “fullness of Christ” (Eph 1:22-23; 4:13), and “the fullness of God” (3:19). A variety of interpretations have been offered for this phrase: the church is filled, made complete or whole by Christ; the church possesses the attributes of Christ; the church is the agent through which Christ does all his work. The church is full of Christ in that it is the complete, continuing expression of his words and works (compare Col 2:10). In the book of Colossians, Paul used the term in reference to Christ; in him dwells the “fullness of God” (1:19; 2:9). These passages are often interpreted as proclaiming the equality of Christ with God. All of God’s attributes are contained in Christ. All that God is, Christ is.<\/p>\n<h4>The Apostle John’s Usage<\/h4>\n<p>The prologue to John’s Gospel states that the “fullness of Christ” is received by all believers (1:16). The exact nature of this fullness is defined in verse 14: “And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth.” The Greek word for “fullness” here indicates plenitude and totality. The Gnostics used the word to describe the totality of all deities. John, as with Paul, used the word to describe Christ as the fullness, the plenitude of God, for all the fullness of the Godhead dwells in him bodily (see Col 1:19; 2:9).<\/p>\n<p>Since all of God’s fullness dwells in Christ, every spiritual reality is found in Christ. In Christ, believers lack nothing. Of course, no single believer could receive all that Christ is; it takes the body of Christ to appropriate Christ’s fullness and to express it (Eph 1:23). Nevertheless, each believer receives in measure the same content of that fullness. Christ is continually full; he never is depleted. No matter how much the believers receive of him, he keeps on giving. Believers do not need to seek any other source but Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FULLNESS Common translation of the Greek term pleroma. The word carries various shades of meaning that must be determined by observing its use in context. General Usage In Greek usage outside the NT, the word means “that which fills.” It is found in reference to the cargo or crew that fills a ship, the people that make up a crowd, and the years that fill a person’s life. The philosopher Aristotle used the term to denote the population that fills a city. That sense is used in Matthew’s and Mar...","summary_en":"FULLNESS Common translation of the Greek term pleroma. The word carries various shades of meaning that must be determined by observing its use in context. General Usage In Greek usage outside the NT, the word means “that which fills.” It is found in reference to the cargo or crew that fills a ship, the people that make up a crowd, and the years that fill a person’s life. The philosopher Aristotle used the term to denote the population that fills a city. That sense is used in Matthew’s and Mar...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":13964,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Glorification","title_en":"Glorification","content_ro":"<h3>GLORIFICATION<\/h3>\n<p>The expression of God’s glory and splendor. The Hebrew word for “glory” originally meant “weighty, heavy, or important.” From there it moved to the idea of an influential, rich, or prominent person. In ancient cultures the wealthy and the powerful were marked by the finery of their dress and jewels. Hence, a person’s glory meant the ostentatious signs of wealth and power. Glory also suggested beauty, since fine clothes and jewels were items of beauty. The concept was then extended to God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GloryofGod\">Glory of God<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the glory of God means something obvious about God. The book of Exodus is rich with references to God’s glory. There was the fiery pillar and the glory that entered into the Holy of Holies in the tabernacle (cf. 40:34-38).<\/p>\n<p>In the making of the tabernacle (Ex 25–27), the concepts of glory and beauty are joined. There is evidence that the “goodness” of the Lord that Moses saw (Ex 33:19) could also be translated as “beauty.” Hence, God’s glory is his beauty.<\/p>\n<p>The NT continues the thought of the OT that God is a God of glory (cf. the vision of God in his glory in Rv 4). But the primary message in the NT centers on the glory of Christ. The transfiguration of Christ was a breaking out into the open of his glory (Mt 17:1-8). The apostle Paul called Jesus the Lord of glory (1 Cor 2:8) and wrote that the glory of God radiated from his face (2 Cor 3:18). John’s Gospel is uniquely the Gospel of glory. In the Incarnation, the Son of God showed the glory that was his as the only begotten of the Father (Jn 1:14). The raising of Lazarus was a manifestation of the glory of God in Christ (11:40). Jesus’ prayer in John 17 is filled with comments on the glory of Christ, including the affirmation that the disciples of the Lord would share in that glory.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GlorificationoftheBeliever\">Glorification of the Believer<\/p>\n<p>In 2 Corinthians 3:18 spiritual transformation is described as a changing from glory to glory. Glorification is implied as the last event in the change from glory to glory. In the process of salvation Paul lists glorification as the last and final event (Rom 8:28-30). The verb used in verse 30 is in the past tense, which some have taken to mean the certainty and finality of glorification. Glorification is the completion, the consummation, the perfection, the full realization of salvation.<\/p>\n<p>Glorification is the perfection of sanctification as it pertains to one’s inner character. No one passage treats this theme extensively, but Ephesians 5:27 may be taken for all. In that passage Paul wrote of presenting the church to Christ, but what he says of the church is true of each Christian. Jesus will present the church to himself in “splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she [the church] might be holy and without blemish.” Or in the language of 2 Timothy 2:10, “Therefore I endure everything for the sake of the elect, that they also may obtain salvation in Christ Jesus with its eternal glory” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Just as the inner person undergoes glorification, so does the believer’s body. Paul calls the resurrection of the body the redemption of the body (Rom 8:23). In Philippians 3:21 Paul speaks of the transformation of bodies of humiliation (i.e., humiliated by sin and mortality) into bodies of glory identical to that of Christ. The power that shall do this is the power of God by which he subjects all things to his reign.<\/p>\n<p>The most extensive treatment on the glorification of the body is found in 1 Corinthians 15, with some additional details in 2 Corinthians 5. Paul’s theme in 1 Corinthians 15 is that as Christians have borne the image of the mortal clay of Adam, they shall bear the image of the immortal Son of God. Paul contrasts the two bodies. The present body is perishable; the resurrection body will be imperishable. This body is one of dishonor; the resurrection body will be one of glory. This body is one of weakness; the resurrection body is one of power. This body is of the current physical order; the resurrection body will be of the future, spiritual, eternal order.<\/p>\n<p>Salvation involves justification, regeneration, and sanctification in this life. In the life to come it means the glorification of the inner person and the resurrection of the body in glory. But such a glorified person must live in a glorified environment. Hence, Scripture must logically end the course of salvation with a glorious new heaven, new earth, and a new Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Glory; Resurrection.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GLORIFICATION<\/h3>\n<p>The expression of God’s glory and splendor. The Hebrew word for “glory” originally meant “weighty, heavy, or important.” From there it moved to the idea of an influential, rich, or prominent person. In ancient cultures the wealthy and the powerful were marked by the finery of their dress and jewels. Hence, a person’s glory meant the ostentatious signs of wealth and power. Glory also suggested beauty, since fine clothes and jewels were items of beauty. The concept was then extended to God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GloryofGod\">Glory of God<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the glory of God means something obvious about God. The book of Exodus is rich with references to God’s glory. There was the fiery pillar and the glory that entered into the Holy of Holies in the tabernacle (cf. 40:34-38).<\/p>\n<p>In the making of the tabernacle (Ex 25–27), the concepts of glory and beauty are joined. There is evidence that the “goodness” of the Lord that Moses saw (Ex 33:19) could also be translated as “beauty.” Hence, God’s glory is his beauty.<\/p>\n<p>The NT continues the thought of the OT that God is a God of glory (cf. the vision of God in his glory in Rv 4). But the primary message in the NT centers on the glory of Christ. The transfiguration of Christ was a breaking out into the open of his glory (Mt 17:1-8). The apostle Paul called Jesus the Lord of glory (1 Cor 2:8) and wrote that the glory of God radiated from his face (2 Cor 3:18). John’s Gospel is uniquely the Gospel of glory. In the Incarnation, the Son of God showed the glory that was his as the only begotten of the Father (Jn 1:14). The raising of Lazarus was a manifestation of the glory of God in Christ (11:40). Jesus’ prayer in John 17 is filled with comments on the glory of Christ, including the affirmation that the disciples of the Lord would share in that glory.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GlorificationoftheBeliever\">Glorification of the Believer<\/p>\n<p>In 2 Corinthians 3:18 spiritual transformation is described as a changing from glory to glory. Glorification is implied as the last event in the change from glory to glory. In the process of salvation Paul lists glorification as the last and final event (Rom 8:28-30). The verb used in verse 30 is in the past tense, which some have taken to mean the certainty and finality of glorification. Glorification is the completion, the consummation, the perfection, the full realization of salvation.<\/p>\n<p>Glorification is the perfection of sanctification as it pertains to one’s inner character. No one passage treats this theme extensively, but Ephesians 5:27 may be taken for all. In that passage Paul wrote of presenting the church to Christ, but what he says of the church is true of each Christian. Jesus will present the church to himself in “splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she [the church] might be holy and without blemish.” Or in the language of 2 Timothy 2:10, “Therefore I endure everything for the sake of the elect, that they also may obtain salvation in Christ Jesus with its eternal glory” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Just as the inner person undergoes glorification, so does the believer’s body. Paul calls the resurrection of the body the redemption of the body (Rom 8:23). In Philippians 3:21 Paul speaks of the transformation of bodies of humiliation (i.e., humiliated by sin and mortality) into bodies of glory identical to that of Christ. The power that shall do this is the power of God by which he subjects all things to his reign.<\/p>\n<p>The most extensive treatment on the glorification of the body is found in 1 Corinthians 15, with some additional details in 2 Corinthians 5. Paul’s theme in 1 Corinthians 15 is that as Christians have borne the image of the mortal clay of Adam, they shall bear the image of the immortal Son of God. Paul contrasts the two bodies. The present body is perishable; the resurrection body will be imperishable. This body is one of dishonor; the resurrection body will be one of glory. This body is one of weakness; the resurrection body is one of power. This body is of the current physical order; the resurrection body will be of the future, spiritual, eternal order.<\/p>\n<p>Salvation involves justification, regeneration, and sanctification in this life. In the life to come it means the glorification of the inner person and the resurrection of the body in glory. But such a glorified person must live in a glorified environment. Hence, Scripture must logically end the course of salvation with a glorious new heaven, new earth, and a new Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Glory; Resurrection.<\/p>","summary_ro":"GLORIFICATION The expression of God’s glory and splendor. The Hebrew word for “glory” originally meant “weighty, heavy, or important.” From there it moved to the idea of an influential, rich, or prominent person. In ancient cultures the wealthy and the powerful were marked by the finery of their dress and jewels. Hence, a person’s glory meant the ostentatious signs of wealth and power. Glory also suggested beauty, since fine clothes and jewels were items of beauty. The concept was then extend...","summary_en":"GLORIFICATION The expression of God’s glory and splendor. The Hebrew word for “glory” originally meant “weighty, heavy, or important.” From there it moved to the idea of an influential, rich, or prominent person. In ancient cultures the wealthy and the powerful were marked by the finery of their dress and jewels. Hence, a person’s glory meant the ostentatious signs of wealth and power. Glory also suggested beauty, since fine clothes and jewels were items of beauty. The concept was then extend...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":14027,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Glory","title_en":"Glory","content_ro":"<h3>GLORY<\/h3>\n<p>The singular splendor of God and the consequences for humanity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGloryofGod\">The Glory of God<\/p>\n<p>The glory of God can be described in two senses: (1) as a general category or attribute, and (2) as a specific category referring to particular historical manifestations of his presence.<\/p>\n<h5>As an Attribute<\/h5>\n<p>God’s glory refers primarily to his majestic beauty and splendor; it also refers to the expression of God’s character (Rom 3:23). The Scriptures record praise to his glorious name (Neh 9:5), describe him as the glorious Father (Eph 1:17) and the King of glory (Ps 24); he is exalted above the heavens, and his glory is over all the earth (Pss 57:5, 11; 108:5; 113:4). He is the God of glory who appeared to the patriarchs of the OT (Acts 7:2). He is jealous to maintain his glory and unwilling that it be given to another (Is 42:8); he acts to bring glory to himself (Ps 79:9; Is 48:11).<\/p>\n<p>The glory of God is proclaimed by the Creation (Pss 19:1; 97:6; Rom 1:20). It is revealed by his mighty acts of salvation and deliverance (1 Chr 16:24; Pss 72:18-19; 96:3; 145:10-12; Jn 11:4, 40). His glory is the theme of the praise (1 Chr 16:24-29; Pss 29:1-2, 9; 66:1-2; 96:7-8; 115:1; Is 42:12; Rom 4:20; Phil 2:9-11).<\/p>\n<h5>As His Presence<\/h5>\n<p>References to the glory of the Lord are often to particular historical manifestations of his presence; images of light and fire are prominently associated with these occurrences. The foremost example is what is known in rabbinical literature as the shekinah glory, a phrase meaning the “dwelling glory.” It refers primarily to the presence of God in the pillar of cloud and fire in the OT.<\/p>\n<p>The first explicit reference to the glory cloud is found in Exodus 13:21-22. At the time of the exodus, the glory of God appeared in the pillar of cloud and fire to lead the people through the sea and wilderness (Neh 9:11-12, 19). At Sinai, with Israel encamped around the mountain, the glory of God comes in the cloud and fire to speak with Moses in the sight of the people (Ex 19:9, 16-18; 24:15-18; Dt 5:5, 22-24). When Moses is given a glimpse of that glory unconcealed by the cloud and fire, his own face becomes radiant and must be veiled because of the people’s fear (Ex 33:18-23; 34:29-35; 2 Cor 3:7-18).<\/p>\n<p>The picture of Israel encamped around the glory of God on Sinai portrays God dwelling in the midst of his people. When the tabernacle is completed and the people set out on their march, the glory cloud of God’s presence dwells above them throughout their journey (Ex 40:34-38; Nm 10:11-12). When they encamp, the tribes encircle the tabernacle (Nm 1:50–2:2), and the cloud reminds them of his presence in their midst. Later, the same glory filled the new temple that Solomon builds (2 Chr 5:13–6:1; 7:1-3). The psalmists celebrated Jerusalem and the temple as the place where his glory dwelt (Pss 26:8; 63:2; 85:9); God was in their midst.<\/p>\n<p>Later in Israel’s history they denied God’s glorious presence (Is 3:8) and exchanged the glory of the Lord for idols made by human hands (Ps 106:20; Jer 2:10-11; cf. Rom 1:23). Because of their disobedience, judgment came against Jerusalem; the penalties of covenant violation were enforced. God would no longer be the God of a disobedient people (Hos 1:9). God’s presence in the glory cloud left the temple (Ez 10:4, 18-19; 11:22), and Israel went into exile (12:1-15).<\/p>\n<p>Yet out of this judgment God determined to bring a remnant to rebuild the city and the temple. In his visions Ezekiel saw the glory of the Lord return to dwell in the temple again (Ez 43:2-9), a time when the glory would return to a purified people and dwell among them forever. When the exile was over and the second temple was under construction, Haggai and Zechariah urged the people on with the promise of the return of the glory of God to fill the temple as it had done in the first temple and to “be glory in their midst” (Hg 2:3-9; Zec 2:5, 10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGloryofGodinJesusChrist\">The Glory of God in Jesus Christ<\/p>\n<p>We are not told if the shekinah glory returned to the second temple. But we are told that God’s glory was seen again on earth in the person of Jesus Christ. John 1:14 says, “The Word became flesh and <em>dwelt<\/em> among us, and we beheld his <em>glory, glory<\/em> as of the only Son” (italics added). As such, Jesus was the new tabernacle for God’s abiding glory. In Jesus, God dwelt among people. Since Christ was (and is) the very image of God, to see the light of his face was to know the glory of God (2 Cor 4:4-6). To see Jesus was to see a “light to the Gentiles and the glory of Israel” (Lk 2:30-32). The disciples who witnessed the Transfiguration (Mt 17:1-8) saw his glory in a marvelous way (2 Pt 1:16-17), for it was a glory that burst out of his human body. This outburst of glory prefigured the glorification Christ experienced in resurrection and ascension (see Jn 17:5; Phil 2:5-11).<\/p>\n<p>Because Jesus humbled himself and was obedient to the point of death, God highly exalted him (Phil 2:8-9). After he suffered death on the cross, he entered into his glory (Lk 24:26) with a new and glorious body (1 Cor 15:39-43; Phil 3:21). The glorified Christ appeared to his servants. Stephen saw his glory (Acts 7:55), and Saul was blinded by his splendor (9:3). That same Christ is predicted to return in glory. He will sit on his throne in judgment (Mt 25:31); evil will be punished (16:27; 24:30; Mk 13:26; Lk 21:27; 2 Thes 2:9-10). Those who have professed him before men need not fear his glorious appearing (Mk 8:38).<\/p>\n<p>At the consummation, the whole earth will be filled with his glory (Ps 72:19; Is 6:3; Hb 2:14). No longer will a glory cloud rest above a temple to mark the Holy Place, for there will be a new heaven and a new earth (Rv 21:1). The Holy City will have the radiance of the glory of God (vv 10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GloryandthePeopleofGod\">Glory and the People of God<\/p>\n<p>The people of God have experienced the glory of the presence of God. The glory cloud of the OT was <em>their<\/em> glory (Ps 106:20; Jer 2:11). Christ came as the embodiment of the glory of God; God was in the midst of his people. When Christ ascended, he sent his Spirit to the believers (Jn 16:7-14) so that God could live in the midst of his people. The Spirit of glory rests on those who suffer for the name of Christ (1 Pt 4:14); that Spirit is the guarantee of the glorious inheritance of the saints (Rom 8:16-17).<\/p>\n<p>God has given to his people the hope of glory (Rom 5:2; Phil 3:21; Col 1:27; Jude 1:24-25). Those whom he has chosen he will also glorify (Rom 8:30; 9:23); they will share in the glory of Christ (Col 3:4; 2 Thes 2:14; 2 Tm 2:10). The sufferings of this age do not compare with the glory that will be revealed (Rom 8:18; 2 Cor 4:17). The whole of creation longs to see the glorious freedom of the children of God (Rom 8:21). This hope of glory is so certain that Peter can speak of participating in it even now (1 Pt 5:1) while looking forward to that eternal glory (v 10). As partakers in the glory of Christ, the church is called to glorify God. Because of the hope that is in them, they purify themselves (1 Jn 3:3).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Boast; God, Being and Attributes of; Pillar of Fire and Cloud; Shekinah; Theophany; Wealth.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GLORY<\/h3>\n<p>The singular splendor of God and the consequences for humanity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGloryofGod\">The Glory of God<\/p>\n<p>The glory of God can be described in two senses: (1) as a general category or attribute, and (2) as a specific category referring to particular historical manifestations of his presence.<\/p>\n<h5>As an Attribute<\/h5>\n<p>God’s glory refers primarily to his majestic beauty and splendor; it also refers to the expression of God’s character (Rom 3:23). The Scriptures record praise to his glorious name (Neh 9:5), describe him as the glorious Father (Eph 1:17) and the King of glory (Ps 24); he is exalted above the heavens, and his glory is over all the earth (Pss 57:5, 11; 108:5; 113:4). He is the God of glory who appeared to the patriarchs of the OT (Acts 7:2). He is jealous to maintain his glory and unwilling that it be given to another (Is 42:8); he acts to bring glory to himself (Ps 79:9; Is 48:11).<\/p>\n<p>The glory of God is proclaimed by the Creation (Pss 19:1; 97:6; Rom 1:20). It is revealed by his mighty acts of salvation and deliverance (1 Chr 16:24; Pss 72:18-19; 96:3; 145:10-12; Jn 11:4, 40). His glory is the theme of the praise (1 Chr 16:24-29; Pss 29:1-2, 9; 66:1-2; 96:7-8; 115:1; Is 42:12; Rom 4:20; Phil 2:9-11).<\/p>\n<h5>As His Presence<\/h5>\n<p>References to the glory of the Lord are often to particular historical manifestations of his presence; images of light and fire are prominently associated with these occurrences. The foremost example is what is known in rabbinical literature as the shekinah glory, a phrase meaning the “dwelling glory.” It refers primarily to the presence of God in the pillar of cloud and fire in the OT.<\/p>\n<p>The first explicit reference to the glory cloud is found in Exodus 13:21-22. At the time of the exodus, the glory of God appeared in the pillar of cloud and fire to lead the people through the sea and wilderness (Neh 9:11-12, 19). At Sinai, with Israel encamped around the mountain, the glory of God comes in the cloud and fire to speak with Moses in the sight of the people (Ex 19:9, 16-18; 24:15-18; Dt 5:5, 22-24). When Moses is given a glimpse of that glory unconcealed by the cloud and fire, his own face becomes radiant and must be veiled because of the people’s fear (Ex 33:18-23; 34:29-35; 2 Cor 3:7-18).<\/p>\n<p>The picture of Israel encamped around the glory of God on Sinai portrays God dwelling in the midst of his people. When the tabernacle is completed and the people set out on their march, the glory cloud of God’s presence dwells above them throughout their journey (Ex 40:34-38; Nm 10:11-12). When they encamp, the tribes encircle the tabernacle (Nm 1:50–2:2), and the cloud reminds them of his presence in their midst. Later, the same glory filled the new temple that Solomon builds (2 Chr 5:13–6:1; 7:1-3). The psalmists celebrated Jerusalem and the temple as the place where his glory dwelt (Pss 26:8; 63:2; 85:9); God was in their midst.<\/p>\n<p>Later in Israel’s history they denied God’s glorious presence (Is 3:8) and exchanged the glory of the Lord for idols made by human hands (Ps 106:20; Jer 2:10-11; cf. Rom 1:23). Because of their disobedience, judgment came against Jerusalem; the penalties of covenant violation were enforced. God would no longer be the God of a disobedient people (Hos 1:9). God’s presence in the glory cloud left the temple (Ez 10:4, 18-19; 11:22), and Israel went into exile (12:1-15).<\/p>\n<p>Yet out of this judgment God determined to bring a remnant to rebuild the city and the temple. In his visions Ezekiel saw the glory of the Lord return to dwell in the temple again (Ez 43:2-9), a time when the glory would return to a purified people and dwell among them forever. When the exile was over and the second temple was under construction, Haggai and Zechariah urged the people on with the promise of the return of the glory of God to fill the temple as it had done in the first temple and to “be glory in their midst” (Hg 2:3-9; Zec 2:5, 10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGloryofGodinJesusChrist\">The Glory of God in Jesus Christ<\/p>\n<p>We are not told if the shekinah glory returned to the second temple. But we are told that God’s glory was seen again on earth in the person of Jesus Christ. John 1:14 says, “The Word became flesh and <em>dwelt<\/em> among us, and we beheld his <em>glory, glory<\/em> as of the only Son” (italics added). As such, Jesus was the new tabernacle for God’s abiding glory. In Jesus, God dwelt among people. Since Christ was (and is) the very image of God, to see the light of his face was to know the glory of God (2 Cor 4:4-6). To see Jesus was to see a “light to the Gentiles and the glory of Israel” (Lk 2:30-32). The disciples who witnessed the Transfiguration (Mt 17:1-8) saw his glory in a marvelous way (2 Pt 1:16-17), for it was a glory that burst out of his human body. This outburst of glory prefigured the glorification Christ experienced in resurrection and ascension (see Jn 17:5; Phil 2:5-11).<\/p>\n<p>Because Jesus humbled himself and was obedient to the point of death, God highly exalted him (Phil 2:8-9). After he suffered death on the cross, he entered into his glory (Lk 24:26) with a new and glorious body (1 Cor 15:39-43; Phil 3:21). The glorified Christ appeared to his servants. Stephen saw his glory (Acts 7:55), and Saul was blinded by his splendor (9:3). That same Christ is predicted to return in glory. He will sit on his throne in judgment (Mt 25:31); evil will be punished (16:27; 24:30; Mk 13:26; Lk 21:27; 2 Thes 2:9-10). Those who have professed him before men need not fear his glorious appearing (Mk 8:38).<\/p>\n<p>At the consummation, the whole earth will be filled with his glory (Ps 72:19; Is 6:3; Hb 2:14). No longer will a glory cloud rest above a temple to mark the Holy Place, for there will be a new heaven and a new earth (Rv 21:1). The Holy City will have the radiance of the glory of God (vv 10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GloryandthePeopleofGod\">Glory and the People of God<\/p>\n<p>The people of God have experienced the glory of the presence of God. The glory cloud of the OT was <em>their<\/em> glory (Ps 106:20; Jer 2:11). Christ came as the embodiment of the glory of God; God was in the midst of his people. When Christ ascended, he sent his Spirit to the believers (Jn 16:7-14) so that God could live in the midst of his people. The Spirit of glory rests on those who suffer for the name of Christ (1 Pt 4:14); that Spirit is the guarantee of the glorious inheritance of the saints (Rom 8:16-17).<\/p>\n<p>God has given to his people the hope of glory (Rom 5:2; Phil 3:21; Col 1:27; Jude 1:24-25). Those whom he has chosen he will also glorify (Rom 8:30; 9:23); they will share in the glory of Christ (Col 3:4; 2 Thes 2:14; 2 Tm 2:10). The sufferings of this age do not compare with the glory that will be revealed (Rom 8:18; 2 Cor 4:17). The whole of creation longs to see the glorious freedom of the children of God (Rom 8:21). This hope of glory is so certain that Peter can speak of participating in it even now (1 Pt 5:1) while looking forward to that eternal glory (v 10). As partakers in the glory of Christ, the church is called to glorify God. Because of the hope that is in them, they purify themselves (1 Jn 3:3).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Boast; God, Being and Attributes of; Pillar of Fire and Cloud; Shekinah; Theophany; Wealth.<\/p>","summary_ro":"GLORY The singular splendor of God and the consequences for humanity. The Glory of God The glory of God can be described in two senses: (1) as a general category or attribute, and (2) as a specific category referring to particular historical manifestations of his presence. As an Attribute God’s glory refers primarily to his majestic beauty and splendor; it also refers to the expression of God’s character (Rom 3:23). The Scriptures record praise to his glorious name (Neh 9:5), describe him as ...","summary_en":"GLORY The singular splendor of God and the consequences for humanity. The Glory of God The glory of God can be described in two senses: (1) as a general category or attribute, and (2) as a specific category referring to particular historical manifestations of his presence. As an Attribute God’s glory refers primarily to his majestic beauty and splendor; it also refers to the expression of God’s character (Rom 3:23). The Scriptures record praise to his glorious name (Neh 9:5), describe him as ...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":14718,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Grace","title_en":"Grace","content_ro":"<h3>GRACE<\/h3>\n<p>The gift of God as expressed in his actions of extending mercy, loving-kindness, and salvation to people.<\/p>\n<p>Grace is the dimension of divine activity that enables God to confront human indifference and rebellion with an inexhaustible capacity to forgive and to bless. God is gracious in action. The doctrine of divine grace underlies the thought of both the OT and NT. However, the OT merely anticipates and prepares for the full expression of grace that becomes manifest in the NT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GraceintheOldTestament\">Grace in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Early in the narrative of the OT, God reveals himself as a “God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness” (Ex 34:6, <span>rsv<\/span>). As a result, it becomes possible for undeserving humans to approach him with the prayer, “If now I have found favor [or grace] in thy sight, O Lord, . . .” (Ex 34:9, <span>rsv<\/span>). Through divine initiative, human alienation from God is turned by him into a state of unmerited acceptance that opens the way for reconciliation and redemptive usefulness.<\/p>\n<p>Divine grace was already operative in the Garden of Eden when God responded to the debacle of the fall with the promise of redemption (Gn 3:15) and solicitous care rather than with abandonment or retributive annihilation. The call to Abraham was an extension of grace, not only to him as an individual, but through him as a means of universal outreach. As an inseparable part of God’s promise of individual blessing to Abraham and of a national blessing to his descendants, the indication was given that the individual and the national blessings would be instrumental in bringing about a universal blessing to “all the families of the earth” (Gn 12:2-3). Consequently, both the election of Abraham and the promise of universal blessing find expression in a God-given covenant, the object of which is to extend God’s grace to the whole human race. In a solemn confirmation of the promise to Abraham, God affirmed, “My covenant is with you, and you shall be the father of a multitude of nations. . . . And I will establish my covenant between me and you and your descendants after you throughout their generations for an everlasting covenant” (Gn 17:4, 7, <span>rsv<\/span>). This promise was to be understood as finding fulfillment on the basis of grace, not of race, so that it would become applicable to all Abraham’s offspring—not only to Jewish believers, his racial descendants, but also to his spiritual descendants, believers from all nations who profess a faith like Abraham’s (Rom 4:16). Thus, from the perspective of divine grace, the election of Abraham and of national Israel was not an end in itself. It was God’s plan for extending his redemptive designs to all believers, from all nations. In extending his grace to Abraham, God was establishing the beginnings of the church, the community of grace.<\/p>\n<p>The divine particularism evidenced in the election of Abraham and in his becoming the recipient of God’s grace provides a model for the selection of all the individuals used by God in the history of redemption. Beyond the benefits of grace accorded to individuals such as Abraham, David, the prophets, and later the apostles, by virtue of their call, loomed the potential of their contributions to the fulfillment of the covenant of God on behalf of the community of those who share the faith of Abraham—the church. In the gracious dealings of God with Israel, with its patriarchs and its leaders, God was laying the basis for his outreach of grace to the church universal. God’s gracious interventions in the old covenant were intended to manifest the ultimacy of the church in his redemptive purposes. In the exercise of their ministries, the prophets of the old covenant knew that they were serving not themselves but the church (1 Pt 1:10-12).<\/p>\n<p>As a transitional, mediatory expression of divine grace, the institutions of the old covenant possessed only a temporary validity that has been superseded by the ultimate manifestations of God’s grace in the new covenant (Heb 8:6-7). Consequently, the old covenant was to become obsolete and replaced by a new covenant that would display the full manifestation of God’s grace. The proverbial tension between law and grace becomes intelligible in this perspective. Like the election of racial Israel, the law (as one of the most visible institutions of the old covenant) was a temporary measure of divine grace accorded to anticipate and prepare the covenant of justification through grace by faith in Jesus Christ (Gal 3:23-29; Heb 10:1).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GraceintheNewTestament\">Grace in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The concept of grace defined as God’s active involvement on behalf of his people receives a sharper focus in the NT. Divine grace becomes embodied in the person of Jesus Christ, who demonstrates visibly the dynamic nature of God’s grace and fulfills in his ministry of redemption the old covenant promises relative to God’s gracious dealings with humanity (Jn 1:14, 17).<\/p>\n<p>God’s grace manifested in Jesus Christ makes it possible for God to forgive sinners and to gather them in the church, the new covenant community. During his ministry, Jesus repeatedly pronounced the words of forgiveness on a great number of sinners and ministered God’s benevolent succor to a variety of desperate human needs. Through teachings such as the father’s forgiveness of the prodigal son and the search for the lost sheep, Jesus made it clear that he had come to seek and save those who were lost. But ultimately it was his redemptive death on the cross that opened wide the gate of salvation for repentant sinners to find access to God’s forgiving and restorative grace. This simple truth is formulated in the doctrine of justification by faith through grace (Rom 3:23; Ti 3:7). According to this teaching, God’s gracious provision of the substitutionary death of Christ enables him to pronounce a verdict of “just” or “not guilty” on repentant sinners and to include them in his eternal purposes. As a result, they enter into the realm of God’s gracious activity, which enables them to implement the process of individual sanctification in cooperation with the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>God’s grace manifested in Jesus Christ also makes it possible for God to bestow on believers undeserved benefits that enrich their lives and unite them together in the church, the body of Christ. Their acceptance on the basis of grace endows them with a new status as children of God, members of the household of God, so that they relate to him as to their heavenly Father (Gal 4:4-6). Consequently, they become members of a community where race, class, and sex distinctions are irrelevant, since they all became equal inheritors of God’s age-long promise to Abraham of universal blessing (3:28-29). In order to enrich their individual lives and to assure the usefulness of their participation in the life of the new community, the Holy Spirit graciously energizes believers with a variety of gifts for the performance of ministries designed to benefit the church (Rom 12:6-8). Foremost among those ministries is that of apostle, itself closely linked to God’s gracious provision (1:5; 15:15-16) since it combines with the ministry of the prophets of old to provide the foundational structure of the church (Eph 2:20). Because the riches of divine grace are freely lavished upon believers in their community life upon earth (1:7-8), the church translated into eternity will demonstrate, by its very existence, the immeasurable riches of God’s grace in Jesus Christ (2:6).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, God’s grace manifested in Jesus Christ makes it possible for God to cause believers to reflect his grace in their character and relationships. The irreducible condition for receiving God’s grace is humility (Jas 4:6; 1 Pt 5:5). Such humility in relation to God enables believers to practice humility in regard to other people. From a position of grace, they can set aside selfishness and conceit in order to treat others with deference (Phil 2:3-4) in an attitude of mutual servanthood (Eph 5:21), and in a spirit of mutual forgiveness (Mt 18:23-35) so that even their communication can exhibit divine grace (Col 4:6). Since the grace of Jesus Christ constitutes the existential context of the lives and relationships of believers, they are exhorted not to pervert the grace of God into ungodly practice (Jude 1:4) but instead to grow in the grace of the Lord (2 Pt 3:18).<\/p>\n<p>The essential meaning of grace in the Bible refers to God’s disposition to exercise goodwill toward his creatures. This favorable disposition of God finds its supreme expression in Jesus Christ. By its very definition, this grace is rendered fully accessible to all humans with no other precondition than a repentant desire to receive it (Ti 2:11-12). As a result, the human condition of alienation from God and from his purposes becomes replaced with access to the otherwise unapproachable majesty of God represented by a throne, so that his grace may become available to meet human need (Heb 4:16). The tragic alternative to receiving God’s grace is to remain in hopeless alienation or to pursue sterile attempts to merit God’s favor through human efforts doomed to futility (Rom 1:21). God’s unconditional acceptance of sinners may be conditioned only by their rejection of his acceptance.<\/p>\n<p>Because Christ represents the fulfillment, the embodiment, and the dispenser of divine grace, the early Christians freely referred to God’s grace as “the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ.” This grace was conceived as being so basic and so pervasive to their individual lives and to the existence of their communities of faith that they naturally coupled the traditional greeting of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shalom<\/span> (“peace”) with a reference to the grace of Jesus Christ. This is the reason for the ubiquitous repetition of numerous variations on the basic greeting formula found in almost every book of the NT, “The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all” (2 Thes 3:18).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Being and Attributes of; Love; Mercy.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GRACE<\/h3>\n<p>The gift of God as expressed in his actions of extending mercy, loving-kindness, and salvation to people.<\/p>\n<p>Grace is the dimension of divine activity that enables God to confront human indifference and rebellion with an inexhaustible capacity to forgive and to bless. God is gracious in action. The doctrine of divine grace underlies the thought of both the OT and NT. However, the OT merely anticipates and prepares for the full expression of grace that becomes manifest in the NT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GraceintheOldTestament\">Grace in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Early in the narrative of the OT, God reveals himself as a “God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness” (Ex 34:6, <span>rsv<\/span>). As a result, it becomes possible for undeserving humans to approach him with the prayer, “If now I have found favor [or grace] in thy sight, O Lord, . . .” (Ex 34:9, <span>rsv<\/span>). Through divine initiative, human alienation from God is turned by him into a state of unmerited acceptance that opens the way for reconciliation and redemptive usefulness.<\/p>\n<p>Divine grace was already operative in the Garden of Eden when God responded to the debacle of the fall with the promise of redemption (Gn 3:15) and solicitous care rather than with abandonment or retributive annihilation. The call to Abraham was an extension of grace, not only to him as an individual, but through him as a means of universal outreach. As an inseparable part of God’s promise of individual blessing to Abraham and of a national blessing to his descendants, the indication was given that the individual and the national blessings would be instrumental in bringing about a universal blessing to “all the families of the earth” (Gn 12:2-3). Consequently, both the election of Abraham and the promise of universal blessing find expression in a God-given covenant, the object of which is to extend God’s grace to the whole human race. In a solemn confirmation of the promise to Abraham, God affirmed, “My covenant is with you, and you shall be the father of a multitude of nations. . . . And I will establish my covenant between me and you and your descendants after you throughout their generations for an everlasting covenant” (Gn 17:4, 7, <span>rsv<\/span>). This promise was to be understood as finding fulfillment on the basis of grace, not of race, so that it would become applicable to all Abraham’s offspring—not only to Jewish believers, his racial descendants, but also to his spiritual descendants, believers from all nations who profess a faith like Abraham’s (Rom 4:16). Thus, from the perspective of divine grace, the election of Abraham and of national Israel was not an end in itself. It was God’s plan for extending his redemptive designs to all believers, from all nations. In extending his grace to Abraham, God was establishing the beginnings of the church, the community of grace.<\/p>\n<p>The divine particularism evidenced in the election of Abraham and in his becoming the recipient of God’s grace provides a model for the selection of all the individuals used by God in the history of redemption. Beyond the benefits of grace accorded to individuals such as Abraham, David, the prophets, and later the apostles, by virtue of their call, loomed the potential of their contributions to the fulfillment of the covenant of God on behalf of the community of those who share the faith of Abraham—the church. In the gracious dealings of God with Israel, with its patriarchs and its leaders, God was laying the basis for his outreach of grace to the church universal. God’s gracious interventions in the old covenant were intended to manifest the ultimacy of the church in his redemptive purposes. In the exercise of their ministries, the prophets of the old covenant knew that they were serving not themselves but the church (1 Pt 1:10-12).<\/p>\n<p>As a transitional, mediatory expression of divine grace, the institutions of the old covenant possessed only a temporary validity that has been superseded by the ultimate manifestations of God’s grace in the new covenant (Heb 8:6-7). Consequently, the old covenant was to become obsolete and replaced by a new covenant that would display the full manifestation of God’s grace. The proverbial tension between law and grace becomes intelligible in this perspective. Like the election of racial Israel, the law (as one of the most visible institutions of the old covenant) was a temporary measure of divine grace accorded to anticipate and prepare the covenant of justification through grace by faith in Jesus Christ (Gal 3:23-29; Heb 10:1).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GraceintheNewTestament\">Grace in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The concept of grace defined as God’s active involvement on behalf of his people receives a sharper focus in the NT. Divine grace becomes embodied in the person of Jesus Christ, who demonstrates visibly the dynamic nature of God’s grace and fulfills in his ministry of redemption the old covenant promises relative to God’s gracious dealings with humanity (Jn 1:14, 17).<\/p>\n<p>God’s grace manifested in Jesus Christ makes it possible for God to forgive sinners and to gather them in the church, the new covenant community. During his ministry, Jesus repeatedly pronounced the words of forgiveness on a great number of sinners and ministered God’s benevolent succor to a variety of desperate human needs. Through teachings such as the father’s forgiveness of the prodigal son and the search for the lost sheep, Jesus made it clear that he had come to seek and save those who were lost. But ultimately it was his redemptive death on the cross that opened wide the gate of salvation for repentant sinners to find access to God’s forgiving and restorative grace. This simple truth is formulated in the doctrine of justification by faith through grace (Rom 3:23; Ti 3:7). According to this teaching, God’s gracious provision of the substitutionary death of Christ enables him to pronounce a verdict of “just” or “not guilty” on repentant sinners and to include them in his eternal purposes. As a result, they enter into the realm of God’s gracious activity, which enables them to implement the process of individual sanctification in cooperation with the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>God’s grace manifested in Jesus Christ also makes it possible for God to bestow on believers undeserved benefits that enrich their lives and unite them together in the church, the body of Christ. Their acceptance on the basis of grace endows them with a new status as children of God, members of the household of God, so that they relate to him as to their heavenly Father (Gal 4:4-6). Consequently, they become members of a community where race, class, and sex distinctions are irrelevant, since they all became equal inheritors of God’s age-long promise to Abraham of universal blessing (3:28-29). In order to enrich their individual lives and to assure the usefulness of their participation in the life of the new community, the Holy Spirit graciously energizes believers with a variety of gifts for the performance of ministries designed to benefit the church (Rom 12:6-8). Foremost among those ministries is that of apostle, itself closely linked to God’s gracious provision (1:5; 15:15-16) since it combines with the ministry of the prophets of old to provide the foundational structure of the church (Eph 2:20). Because the riches of divine grace are freely lavished upon believers in their community life upon earth (1:7-8), the church translated into eternity will demonstrate, by its very existence, the immeasurable riches of God’s grace in Jesus Christ (2:6).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, God’s grace manifested in Jesus Christ makes it possible for God to cause believers to reflect his grace in their character and relationships. The irreducible condition for receiving God’s grace is humility (Jas 4:6; 1 Pt 5:5). Such humility in relation to God enables believers to practice humility in regard to other people. From a position of grace, they can set aside selfishness and conceit in order to treat others with deference (Phil 2:3-4) in an attitude of mutual servanthood (Eph 5:21), and in a spirit of mutual forgiveness (Mt 18:23-35) so that even their communication can exhibit divine grace (Col 4:6). Since the grace of Jesus Christ constitutes the existential context of the lives and relationships of believers, they are exhorted not to pervert the grace of God into ungodly practice (Jude 1:4) but instead to grow in the grace of the Lord (2 Pt 3:18).<\/p>\n<p>The essential meaning of grace in the Bible refers to God’s disposition to exercise goodwill toward his creatures. This favorable disposition of God finds its supreme expression in Jesus Christ. By its very definition, this grace is rendered fully accessible to all humans with no other precondition than a repentant desire to receive it (Ti 2:11-12). As a result, the human condition of alienation from God and from his purposes becomes replaced with access to the otherwise unapproachable majesty of God represented by a throne, so that his grace may become available to meet human need (Heb 4:16). The tragic alternative to receiving God’s grace is to remain in hopeless alienation or to pursue sterile attempts to merit God’s favor through human efforts doomed to futility (Rom 1:21). God’s unconditional acceptance of sinners may be conditioned only by their rejection of his acceptance.<\/p>\n<p>Because Christ represents the fulfillment, the embodiment, and the dispenser of divine grace, the early Christians freely referred to God’s grace as “the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ.” This grace was conceived as being so basic and so pervasive to their individual lives and to the existence of their communities of faith that they naturally coupled the traditional greeting of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shalom<\/span> (“peace”) with a reference to the grace of Jesus Christ. This is the reason for the ubiquitous repetition of numerous variations on the basic greeting formula found in almost every book of the NT, “The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all” (2 Thes 3:18).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Being and Attributes of; Love; Mercy.<\/p>","summary_ro":"GRACE The gift of God as expressed in his actions of extending mercy, loving-kindness, and salvation to people. Grace is the dimension of divine activity that enables God to confront human indifference and rebellion with an inexhaustible capacity to forgive and to bless. God is gracious in action. The doctrine of divine grace underlies the thought of both the OT and NT. However, the OT merely anticipates and prepares for the full expression of grace that becomes manifest in the NT. Grace in t...","summary_en":"GRACE The gift of God as expressed in his actions of extending mercy, loving-kindness, and salvation to people. Grace is the dimension of divine activity that enables God to confront human indifference and rebellion with an inexhaustible capacity to forgive and to bless. God is gracious in action. The doctrine of divine grace underlies the thought of both the OT and NT. However, the OT merely anticipates and prepares for the full expression of grace that becomes manifest in the NT. Grace in t...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":17351,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Incarnation*","title_en":"Incarnation*","content_ro":"<h3>INCARNATION*<\/h3>\n<p>Literally, “in flesh”; theologically, the doctrine that in Jesus of Nazareth God took on human flesh and became the God-man. Historically, the doctrine of incarnation was central in the christological debates of patristic times and has recently come to the fore again in academic circles. Biblically, it expresses the mystery of Jesus’ identity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentTestimony\">New Testament Testimony<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Mark has no account of the Incarnation and stresses Jesus’ messiahship more than his deity. As a result, some believe that it represents an earlier stage in the development of the church’s theology, before the doctrine of incarnation had evolved. That is doubtful for two reasons: Incarnation passages like the Philippians hymn (Phil 2:6-11) probably antedate Mark’s Gospel, and Mark has a well-developed theology of the two natures of Christ. Although he stresses Jesus’ humanity, Mark accents it with an emphasis on divinity. Jesus was called the “beloved Son” by a heavenly voice at his baptism and transfiguration (Mk 1:11; 9:7); demons called him divine (3:11; 5:7), as did a Roman centurion (15:39). Jesus’ “Abba” prayers (14:36; cf. Mt 26:39; Lk 22:42) indicate his sense of divine identity, and at his trial he was charged with claiming the title “Son of the Blessed” (14:61-62). Thus, though the Incarnation is nowhere explicitly stated in Mark, it is implicitly affirmed.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew and Luke express the Incarnation. The birth narratives, of course, stress the event itself, with Matthew emphasizing Jesus’ royal messiahship, and Luke, the divine witness of the Holy Spirit. Matthew’s Gospel is Christ-centered; Luke concentrates on Christ as Savior, or more precisely, on salvation-history. Although Matthew presents Jesus’ humanity, he emphasizes his lordship (Mt 23:6-10) and divine sonship. The Incarnation thus becomes the means whereby the divine becomes human in a universal sense (1:23; 18:20; 24:14; 28:18-20). Luke shows the greatest interest of the three in Jesus’ earthly life. Nevertheless, his Gospel does not stress the human side of Jesus as much as Mark’s. Luke portrays Jesus primarily as the divine Savior within history (Lk 2:11; 4:16-30). He combines Jesus’ messianic office and divine nature, showing that the incarnate Son of God suffered and was exalted in order to bring people to God.<\/p>\n<h5>John’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>The apostle John’s doctrine of incarnation is more explicit than any of the others, teaching not only Jesus’ God-man status but also his preexistent “glory” (Jn 1:1-18). Central in this presentation is the oneness between Jesus and God the Father (10:29-30; 14:8-11; 1 Jn 2:23). The “I am” (the expressed Christ, taken from the OT title for the one true God and probably signifying God’s personal name, Yahweh) came to reveal God to his people (Jn 1:4-5, 14, 18). Yet John also has the most balanced presentation of the Incarnation. The divine Logos or Word (1:1-18) is the exemplar of perfect humanity; he “became flesh” (v 14) to enlighten people (vv 5, 9) and generate in them “eternal life” (3:14-18; 1 Jn 1:1-3; 4:9).<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Epistles<\/h5>\n<p>The apostle Paul presented the Incarnation as Jesus’ path to suffering and redemption. In Galatians 4:4-5 the Incarnation (“born of woman”) came “in the fullness of time” or at the apex of salvation-history, to “redeem those who were under the law.” In the Philippians hymn (Phil 2:6-11, quotes from <span>nasb<\/span>), the Incarnation is seen in terms of preexistence (“though he was in the form of God”), humiliation (“emptied . . . humbled”), and obedience (“becoming obedient to the point of death”). The goal of the Incarnation was the cross (“even death on a cross”), and its result was Christ’s exaltation. The hymn is perhaps the supreme theological statement on the Incarnation in the NT. Jesus’ human life was an “emptying,” a refusal to seize the prerogatives of his deity (“did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped”).<\/p>\n<p>Paul described Christ as a second Adam (Rom 5:12-19; 1 Cor 15:45-47), who brought humanity a new possibility to attain what Adam had forsaken. Through assuming the form of a man, Christ became the Redeemer who reconciles people to God (Rom 3:25; 2 Cor 5:19; 1 Tm 1:15). Paul stressed even more, however, that the exalted Christ provides newness of life (Rom 6:4-6; 2 Cor 3:17-18; Col 3:1-4). A hymn in the Letter to the Colossians (1:15-20) employs ideas from Jewish wisdom speculation, and possibly Greek themes, to show Christ as the “firstborn” and the “fullness of God.” The one who always existed as God, through his sacrificial death, became the exalted Lord and brought humankind to God (see also the “flesh-spirit” theme in Rom 1:3-4; 1 Tm 3:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Hebrews<\/h5>\n<p>The Letter to the Hebrews strongly speaks of the Incarnation. The opening hymn (Heb 1:1-3) accents Christ’s exalted status as “the very stamp” of God’s image and the radiance of his glory. Christ is superior to the angels (1:4-9), yet he became a man in order to suffer for human salvation (2:9; 5:7-9). The Incarnation is aligned with sinful humankind’s need for a Savior. The purpose of Hebrews is to show Christ’s incomparable superiority to the OT sacrifices, and at the same time to stress his work of salvation. His real temptation (2:18; 4:15) combined with his sinlessness (4:15; 5:9; 7:26) is the human remedy for human sin. The Incarnation was Christ’s path to final, once-for-all atonement and victory over sin (7:28; 9:26).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalDevelopment\">Historical Development<\/p>\n<p>The first group to challenge the traditional doctrine of incarnation was the Gnostics, who in the late first century denied that Jesus was truly human. Their Greek belief that the physical creation was evil led them to deny the Incarnation. They believed Christ to be a quasi-spiritual being who merely appeared human. The theologian Marcion (d. c. 160), trained by Gnostic teachers, also accepted a docetic interpretation of Christ (his humanity was only apparent). Marcion taught his doctrine as an antidote to the OT or Jewish-oriented Christianity in his day. After his excommunication in <span>AD<\/span> 144, Marcion founded his own church, and his views were widely disseminated in the next two centuries. Partly in reaction to Marcion’s christological heresy, the orthodox churches unified their doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>The next challenge to the orthodox view came through the Arian, Apollinarian, and Nestorian controversies in the third and fourth centuries. Arianism held that the Incarnation was total, so that Christ the Logos was no longer fully God. At the same time, he was not fully human, so Christ was someone between two natures. The Council of Nicaea (<span>AD<\/span> 325) affirmed that Jesus was indeed both God and man. A further question soon arose, however, as to the relation between his two natures. Apollinarius (310?–390?) taught that only the body of Jesus was human; his soul was absorbed completely into the divine Logos. Nestorius (c. 381–451) taught that the two natures must always remain distinct in the person of Christ; they functioned together but were separate in his being. The Council of Chalcedon (<span>AD<\/span> 451) affirmed the unity of the two natures in Jesus. Many opponents of Chalcedon arose, called Monophysites, who believed in one divine nature in Jesus, who was only in a sense human. That movement caused serious political and religious divisions, and the Council of Constantinople (680–81) reaffirmed Chalcedon and established the orthodox incarnation theology.<\/p>\n<p>In the eighth century, Spain and France were centers of the “adoptionist” controversy. Adoptionism taught that at birth Jesus was human, but at his baptism he underwent a “second birth” and was “adopted” as Son of God. It was condemned in a series of synods and never gained many adherents until modern times. During the scholastic age, Peter Lombard (1095?–1160) advocated what became known as “nihilism.” The Incarnation supposedly caused no fundamental change in Jesus’ deity, but his human nature was both insubstantial and unessential. That view likewise was condemned by Pope Alexander III (1159–81). Another debate at that time centered on the relationship between the fall and the Incarnation. Thomas Aquinas (1224–74) concluded that there was a cause-effect connection; the Incarnation was necessitated by sin rather than predestined apart from the fall.<\/p>\n<p>The Roman Catholic Church and the Protestant Reformers follow basically the same orthodox teaching about the Incarnation. The conflict in the Reformation centered more on soteriology (the doctrine of salvation). Several aberrant antitrinitarian movements took advantage of the breakdown in ecclesiastical authority, however. Michael Servetus (1511–53) taught a pantheistic view of the Incarnation, focused on the divine Spirit becoming manifest in the human form of Jesus. Thus the Logos is not a distinct person in the Godhead, nor is it fundamentally different from a “divine spark” in every person. At the same time Laelius Socinus (1525–62) and his nephew, Faustus Socinus (1539–1604), taught a unitarian system. The Incarnation was not a transferral of the divine essence but a communication of divine authority and revelation. Christ thus did not die as an atonement but as a moral example. Both Servetus and Socinianism were condemned by Catholics and Protestants alike.<\/p>\n<p>In the 17th and 18th centuries “kenoticism” (from Greek for “empty”) taught that in the Incarnation the Logos totally “emptied himself” (Phil 2:7) of the divine attributes. That doctrine represented the final phase of a dialogue from the scholastic period about the exact communication between Jesus’ two natures. Was his human nature omnipotent? If not, how did the man Jesus exercise the divine attributes? The kenotic school believed that Jesus was fully human and that his divine nature was quiescent until after the Ascension. His miraculous powers were external, given by the Spirit. Against that view, the majority of theologians argued that Jesus was at all times both God and man, and that in Philippians 2:6-8 Jesus did not lay aside the attributes of deity (he still exhibited the “form of God”) but rather the majesty associated with deity.<\/p>\n<p>The 19th and 20th centuries have given rise to a view that the Incarnation was a “myth,” a pictorial way of describing how God spoke through Jesus. The virgin birth was not historical, nor did any of the supernatural events of the Gospels ever take place. Rather, the stories in the Gospels were concoctions of the later church, efforts to portray Jesus’ impact on the movement. The Gospels, however, have too strong a flavor of accurate history for such a view to prevail (see Lk 1:1-5; Jn 19:35; 21:24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>The NT teaching on the Incarnation balances the humanity and divinity of Christ. Those two facts must harmonize in any theological system, for both are absolutely necessary parts of God’s redemptive plan. In the Incarnation, Jesus became a perfect human being. As God in human flesh, he suffered the divine penalty for sin as an innocent substitute. Being both God and man, Jesus simultaneously revealed God’s will for human life and reconciled sinful people to God through his own perfect life and death. Because of the Incarnation, therefore, those who believe in Christ have peace with God and new life from God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>INCARNATION*<\/h3>\n<p>Literally, “in flesh”; theologically, the doctrine that in Jesus of Nazareth God took on human flesh and became the God-man. Historically, the doctrine of incarnation was central in the christological debates of patristic times and has recently come to the fore again in academic circles. Biblically, it expresses the mystery of Jesus’ identity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentTestimony\">New Testament Testimony<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Mark has no account of the Incarnation and stresses Jesus’ messiahship more than his deity. As a result, some believe that it represents an earlier stage in the development of the church’s theology, before the doctrine of incarnation had evolved. That is doubtful for two reasons: Incarnation passages like the Philippians hymn (Phil 2:6-11) probably antedate Mark’s Gospel, and Mark has a well-developed theology of the two natures of Christ. Although he stresses Jesus’ humanity, Mark accents it with an emphasis on divinity. Jesus was called the “beloved Son” by a heavenly voice at his baptism and transfiguration (Mk 1:11; 9:7); demons called him divine (3:11; 5:7), as did a Roman centurion (15:39). Jesus’ “Abba” prayers (14:36; cf. Mt 26:39; Lk 22:42) indicate his sense of divine identity, and at his trial he was charged with claiming the title “Son of the Blessed” (14:61-62). Thus, though the Incarnation is nowhere explicitly stated in Mark, it is implicitly affirmed.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew and Luke express the Incarnation. The birth narratives, of course, stress the event itself, with Matthew emphasizing Jesus’ royal messiahship, and Luke, the divine witness of the Holy Spirit. Matthew’s Gospel is Christ-centered; Luke concentrates on Christ as Savior, or more precisely, on salvation-history. Although Matthew presents Jesus’ humanity, he emphasizes his lordship (Mt 23:6-10) and divine sonship. The Incarnation thus becomes the means whereby the divine becomes human in a universal sense (1:23; 18:20; 24:14; 28:18-20). Luke shows the greatest interest of the three in Jesus’ earthly life. Nevertheless, his Gospel does not stress the human side of Jesus as much as Mark’s. Luke portrays Jesus primarily as the divine Savior within history (Lk 2:11; 4:16-30). He combines Jesus’ messianic office and divine nature, showing that the incarnate Son of God suffered and was exalted in order to bring people to God.<\/p>\n<h5>John’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>The apostle John’s doctrine of incarnation is more explicit than any of the others, teaching not only Jesus’ God-man status but also his preexistent “glory” (Jn 1:1-18). Central in this presentation is the oneness between Jesus and God the Father (10:29-30; 14:8-11; 1 Jn 2:23). The “I am” (the expressed Christ, taken from the OT title for the one true God and probably signifying God’s personal name, Yahweh) came to reveal God to his people (Jn 1:4-5, 14, 18). Yet John also has the most balanced presentation of the Incarnation. The divine Logos or Word (1:1-18) is the exemplar of perfect humanity; he “became flesh” (v 14) to enlighten people (vv 5, 9) and generate in them “eternal life” (3:14-18; 1 Jn 1:1-3; 4:9).<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Epistles<\/h5>\n<p>The apostle Paul presented the Incarnation as Jesus’ path to suffering and redemption. In Galatians 4:4-5 the Incarnation (“born of woman”) came “in the fullness of time” or at the apex of salvation-history, to “redeem those who were under the law.” In the Philippians hymn (Phil 2:6-11, quotes from <span>nasb<\/span>), the Incarnation is seen in terms of preexistence (“though he was in the form of God”), humiliation (“emptied . . . humbled”), and obedience (“becoming obedient to the point of death”). The goal of the Incarnation was the cross (“even death on a cross”), and its result was Christ’s exaltation. The hymn is perhaps the supreme theological statement on the Incarnation in the NT. Jesus’ human life was an “emptying,” a refusal to seize the prerogatives of his deity (“did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped”).<\/p>\n<p>Paul described Christ as a second Adam (Rom 5:12-19; 1 Cor 15:45-47), who brought humanity a new possibility to attain what Adam had forsaken. Through assuming the form of a man, Christ became the Redeemer who reconciles people to God (Rom 3:25; 2 Cor 5:19; 1 Tm 1:15). Paul stressed even more, however, that the exalted Christ provides newness of life (Rom 6:4-6; 2 Cor 3:17-18; Col 3:1-4). A hymn in the Letter to the Colossians (1:15-20) employs ideas from Jewish wisdom speculation, and possibly Greek themes, to show Christ as the “firstborn” and the “fullness of God.” The one who always existed as God, through his sacrificial death, became the exalted Lord and brought humankind to God (see also the “flesh-spirit” theme in Rom 1:3-4; 1 Tm 3:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Hebrews<\/h5>\n<p>The Letter to the Hebrews strongly speaks of the Incarnation. The opening hymn (Heb 1:1-3) accents Christ’s exalted status as “the very stamp” of God’s image and the radiance of his glory. Christ is superior to the angels (1:4-9), yet he became a man in order to suffer for human salvation (2:9; 5:7-9). The Incarnation is aligned with sinful humankind’s need for a Savior. The purpose of Hebrews is to show Christ’s incomparable superiority to the OT sacrifices, and at the same time to stress his work of salvation. His real temptation (2:18; 4:15) combined with his sinlessness (4:15; 5:9; 7:26) is the human remedy for human sin. The Incarnation was Christ’s path to final, once-for-all atonement and victory over sin (7:28; 9:26).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalDevelopment\">Historical Development<\/p>\n<p>The first group to challenge the traditional doctrine of incarnation was the Gnostics, who in the late first century denied that Jesus was truly human. Their Greek belief that the physical creation was evil led them to deny the Incarnation. They believed Christ to be a quasi-spiritual being who merely appeared human. The theologian Marcion (d. c. 160), trained by Gnostic teachers, also accepted a docetic interpretation of Christ (his humanity was only apparent). Marcion taught his doctrine as an antidote to the OT or Jewish-oriented Christianity in his day. After his excommunication in <span>AD<\/span> 144, Marcion founded his own church, and his views were widely disseminated in the next two centuries. Partly in reaction to Marcion’s christological heresy, the orthodox churches unified their doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>The next challenge to the orthodox view came through the Arian, Apollinarian, and Nestorian controversies in the third and fourth centuries. Arianism held that the Incarnation was total, so that Christ the Logos was no longer fully God. At the same time, he was not fully human, so Christ was someone between two natures. The Council of Nicaea (<span>AD<\/span> 325) affirmed that Jesus was indeed both God and man. A further question soon arose, however, as to the relation between his two natures. Apollinarius (310?–390?) taught that only the body of Jesus was human; his soul was absorbed completely into the divine Logos. Nestorius (c. 381–451) taught that the two natures must always remain distinct in the person of Christ; they functioned together but were separate in his being. The Council of Chalcedon (<span>AD<\/span> 451) affirmed the unity of the two natures in Jesus. Many opponents of Chalcedon arose, called Monophysites, who believed in one divine nature in Jesus, who was only in a sense human. That movement caused serious political and religious divisions, and the Council of Constantinople (680–81) reaffirmed Chalcedon and established the orthodox incarnation theology.<\/p>\n<p>In the eighth century, Spain and France were centers of the “adoptionist” controversy. Adoptionism taught that at birth Jesus was human, but at his baptism he underwent a “second birth” and was “adopted” as Son of God. It was condemned in a series of synods and never gained many adherents until modern times. During the scholastic age, Peter Lombard (1095?–1160) advocated what became known as “nihilism.” The Incarnation supposedly caused no fundamental change in Jesus’ deity, but his human nature was both insubstantial and unessential. That view likewise was condemned by Pope Alexander III (1159–81). Another debate at that time centered on the relationship between the fall and the Incarnation. Thomas Aquinas (1224–74) concluded that there was a cause-effect connection; the Incarnation was necessitated by sin rather than predestined apart from the fall.<\/p>\n<p>The Roman Catholic Church and the Protestant Reformers follow basically the same orthodox teaching about the Incarnation. The conflict in the Reformation centered more on soteriology (the doctrine of salvation). Several aberrant antitrinitarian movements took advantage of the breakdown in ecclesiastical authority, however. Michael Servetus (1511–53) taught a pantheistic view of the Incarnation, focused on the divine Spirit becoming manifest in the human form of Jesus. Thus the Logos is not a distinct person in the Godhead, nor is it fundamentally different from a “divine spark” in every person. At the same time Laelius Socinus (1525–62) and his nephew, Faustus Socinus (1539–1604), taught a unitarian system. The Incarnation was not a transferral of the divine essence but a communication of divine authority and revelation. Christ thus did not die as an atonement but as a moral example. Both Servetus and Socinianism were condemned by Catholics and Protestants alike.<\/p>\n<p>In the 17th and 18th centuries “kenoticism” (from Greek for “empty”) taught that in the Incarnation the Logos totally “emptied himself” (Phil 2:7) of the divine attributes. That doctrine represented the final phase of a dialogue from the scholastic period about the exact communication between Jesus’ two natures. Was his human nature omnipotent? If not, how did the man Jesus exercise the divine attributes? The kenotic school believed that Jesus was fully human and that his divine nature was quiescent until after the Ascension. His miraculous powers were external, given by the Spirit. Against that view, the majority of theologians argued that Jesus was at all times both God and man, and that in Philippians 2:6-8 Jesus did not lay aside the attributes of deity (he still exhibited the “form of God”) but rather the majesty associated with deity.<\/p>\n<p>The 19th and 20th centuries have given rise to a view that the Incarnation was a “myth,” a pictorial way of describing how God spoke through Jesus. The virgin birth was not historical, nor did any of the supernatural events of the Gospels ever take place. Rather, the stories in the Gospels were concoctions of the later church, efforts to portray Jesus’ impact on the movement. The Gospels, however, have too strong a flavor of accurate history for such a view to prevail (see Lk 1:1-5; Jn 19:35; 21:24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>The NT teaching on the Incarnation balances the humanity and divinity of Christ. Those two facts must harmonize in any theological system, for both are absolutely necessary parts of God’s redemptive plan. In the Incarnation, Jesus became a perfect human being. As God in human flesh, he suffered the divine penalty for sin as an innocent substitute. Being both God and man, Jesus simultaneously revealed God’s will for human life and reconciled sinful people to God through his own perfect life and death. Because of the Incarnation, therefore, those who believe in Christ have peace with God and new life from God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"INCARNATION* Literally, “in flesh”; theologically, the doctrine that in Jesus of Nazareth God took on human flesh and became the God-man. Historically, the doctrine of incarnation was central in the christological debates of patristic times and has recently come to the fore again in academic circles. Biblically, it expresses the mystery of Jesus’ identity. New Testament Testimony The Synoptic Gospels The Gospel of Mark has no account of the Incarnation and stresses Jesus’ messiahship more tha...","summary_en":"INCARNATION* Literally, “in flesh”; theologically, the doctrine that in Jesus of Nazareth God took on human flesh and became the God-man. Historically, the doctrine of incarnation was central in the christological debates of patristic times and has recently come to the fore again in academic circles. Biblically, it expresses the mystery of Jesus’ identity. New Testament Testimony The Synoptic Gospels The Gospel of Mark has no account of the Incarnation and stresses Jesus’ messiahship more tha...","source":"Articles\/I.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":25461,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Messiah","title_en":"Messiah","content_ro":"<h3>MESSIAH<\/h3>\n<p>Title derived from the Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiach<\/span><em>,<\/em> a verbal adjective meaning “anointed one.” Along with its NT equivalent, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> (Christ), it refers to an act of consecration whereby an individual is set apart to serve God and then anointed with oil. The verbal root <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashach<\/span><em>)<\/em> conveys this idea as well.<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s practice of ceremonially anointing with oil is present in several contexts. Priests were regularly anointed prior to their divinely given service at the altar of sacrifice (Lv 4:3). While there is evidence for a literal anointing of prophets (1 Kgs 19:16), this does not appear to have been a standard practice. The anointing of Saul and David by Samuel established the act as a significant prerequisite for Hebrew kings before they assumed their positions of royal leadership. The king was especially considered to be the Lord’s anointed and as such was viewed to hold a secure position before men (1 Sm 12:14; 2 Sm 19:21) and God (Pss 2:2; 20:6). Along with numerous messianic prophecies, these proceedings helped inform the Jews of the Anointed One, par excellence, who would eventually come to bring salvation to Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Concluding the 13 articles of Hebraic faith attributed to Moses Maimonides (13th century <span>AD<\/span>) is the statement still found in many Hebrew prayer books: “I believe with a perfect heart that the Messiah will come; and although his coming be delayed, I will still wait patiently for his speedy appearance.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MessiahintheOldTestament\">Messiah in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Jewish hope for the advent of the Messiah developed dynamically from the period of David’s reign, when it was prophesied that his kingdom would endure to the end of time (2 Sm 7:16). Israel was told that, through David’s descendants, his throne would exert a never-ending dominion over all the earth (2 Sm 22:48-51; Jer 33). It is with this aspect of messianic salvation that Jewish minds have traditionally been preoccupied (cf. Acts 1:6).<\/p>\n<p>Among Orthodox rabbis there has never been a lack of conjecture respecting the details of the Messiah’s ministry. At one time the rabbis applied no less than 456 passages of Scripture to his person and salvation. Preoccupation with the Messiah is evident in the tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> (Babylonian Talmud), where passages state that the world was created for him and that all the prophets prophesied of his days (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 98b, 99a). By and large, Orthodoxy still retains its time-worn belief in the Messiah’s reign in Jerusalem, the rebuilding of the temple, and the reestablishment of both priesthood and sacrifice.<\/p>\n<p>While later Judaism looked for the Messiah as an eschatological figure who will reign at the end of time, modern Jewish thought has largely jettisoned the traditional notion of a personal Messiah in favor of belief in a messianic age. Prevalent liberal Judaism envisions the world ultimately perfected through the influence of the twin Judaic ideals of justice and compassion. Such conviction, ignoring the plight of fallen humans and the teaching of Scripture, substitutes humanistic thinking for miraculous heavenly intervention.<\/p>\n<p>While the Messiah’s origin is linked firmly to the house of David (2 Sm 7:14; Hos 3:5), the promise for a Messiah was given long before David lived. In fact, the hope for the Messiah is implicit in the first promise of the establishment of the kingdom of God. Addressed to Satan, Genesis 3:15 declares that God will place hostility between the serpent and the woman until, in the fullness of time, the “seed” of the woman inflicts a fatal blow to the head of the serpent.<\/p>\n<p>The nature of messianic prophecy is progressive; each prophecy casts more light on the subject. This occurs, for example, respecting the concept of the “seed”: Messiah is to be born of a woman (Gn 3:15), through the line of Shem (9:26) and specifically through Abraham (22:18). Yet even as late as Genesis 22:18, the “seed” is not clearly presented as a person, since <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">zerah<\/span> (seed) may indicate a singular or plural object. Still less apparent in these early stages of messianic prophecy is the nature of the “bruising” that is to occur. Yet the idea of the Messiah being crushed for sin is implicit in the Genesis pronouncement, as is the violence associated with that act. Chief among the messianic prophets, Isaiah gives full range to the axiom that the Anointed One must endure extensive suffering (Is 53:1). Under the figure “the Servant of the Lord,” four “servant songs” delineate the mission of the future deliverer (Is 42:1-7; 49:1-9; 50:4-11; 52:13–53:12). While it is true that Isaiah does not explicitly link the title Messiah with the Servant of the Lord, identifying both figures as one and the same person is justifiable. Both figures are uniquely anointed (61:1); each brings light to the Gentiles (55:4; cf. 49:6); neither is pretentious in his first appearance (7:14-15; 11:1; cf. 42:3; 53:1); and the title of Davidic “branch” rests upon them both (11:1-4). Equally significant are the dual facts of their humiliation and exaltation (49:7; 52:13-15). Jewish scholars of the early Christian era in the Aramaic Targum on the prophets paraphrase Isaiah 42:1, “Behold my Servant Messiah” and begin Isaiah 53, “Behold my Servant Messiah will prosper.” While Cyrus may be spoken of as “anointed,” no final salvific work is attributed to him (45:1-5). Israel, although elect and loved by God (41:8), is ill-equipped as God’s servant to bring his redeeming work to mankind (42:18). The collapse of David’s dynasty points eloquently to Israel’s need for an anointed monarch who will heal the apostasy and disobedience (Ex 33:5; Hos 4:1). More and more, OT history presents Israel’s comprehensive moral failure. Her problem, which she shares with mankind, can only be solved by the making of a covenant whose surety and focal point is both a personal Savior and sovereign Lord (Jer 31:31-34). The advent of such a champion lives in the recorded promise of a shoot from the stump of Jesse’s fallen tree, who will bring the light of life to God’s benighted people (Is 9:2; 11:1).<\/p>\n<p>It is difficult to get away from the idea that the concept of servanthood and lowliness belongs within the sphere of royalty (Zec 9:9). The concept of the Messiah filling the complementary offices of priest and king is incontrovertible (Ps 110:1-4); a suffering priest-king is far less obvious. Some among the Talmudic writers apparently recognized the likelihood that the Messiah would have to suffer. In the Babylonian Talmud, tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 98b, the Messiah is said to bear sicknesses and pain. Among the prayers for the Day of Atonement may be found the words of Eleazar ben Qalir (perhaps as late as <span>AD<\/span> 1000): “Our righteous Messiah has departed from us; we are horror-stricken, and there is none to justify us. Our iniquities and the yoke of our transgressions he carries, and is wounded for our transgressions. He bears on his shoulders our sins to find pardon for our iniquities. May we be healed by his stripes.” In a similar vein Rabbi Eliyya de Vidas writes, “The meaning of ‘He was wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities,’ is that since the Messiah bears our iniquities, which produce the effect of His being bruised, it follows that whosoever will not admit that the Messiah thus suffers for our iniquities must endure and suffer for them himself.” For all this, it is highly doubtful that anyone imagined the Messiah would accomplish his salvational work by means of his own death (cf. Is 53:12). When rabbinic speculation failed to satisfactorily harmonize the paradoxical facts of humiliation and exaltation, some hypothesized that God would send a Messiah to suffer as well as a Messiah to reign. Biblically, it is evident that the Anointed One’s terrible ordeal of suffering is but the necessary prelude to infinite glory. He is pictured not only as a great king (52:13; 53:12) but also as humble (53:2), humiliated (52:14), rejected (53:3), and bearing the consequences of mankind’s rebellion (vv 5-6). Yet he is raised up to intercede for, and richly bless, his people (v 12). The Messiah, having accomplished that full obedience that Adam and Israel failed to achieve, will bring Israel and the nations back to God (42:18-19; 49:3, 6).<\/p>\n<p>The writings of Daniel contain important messianic data. Daniel is unique in that he boldly speaks of “Messiah the Prince” (Dn 9:25), identifies him as the “Son of Man” (7:13), and says he suffers (“cut off,” 9:26). This statement of the cutting off (i.e., death) of the Messiah makes possible his work of atonement (9:24). The doctrine of a vicarious substitutionary atonement is the only doctrine of atonement found in the Bible (cf. Lv 17:11). Israel understood that to bear sin meant enduring the consequences, or penalty, for sin (cf. Nm 14:33). The same penal substitution is evident in the working principle of the Messiah’s atoning sacrifice. He is the victim’s substitute to whom is transferred the suffering due the sinner. The penalty having been thus borne vicariously, the suppliant is fully pardoned.<\/p>\n<p>Psalm 22:1 records the plaintive cry of the Messiah bearing man’s penalty for sin (cf. Mt 27:46) as he becomes sin on behalf of his people (2 Cor 5:21). Yet his cry, “My God,” indicates an intimate relationship that cannot be radically severed. Once again the motif of messianic humiliation prior to great exaltation is in view (Ps 22:27). In the so-called “royal psalms” (e.g., 2; 72; 110) it is the priestly intercessor who is also ordained to function as monarch and judge.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah brings the portrait a step further. The one who will enable humans to enter into a salvational covenant with God conveys God’s imputed righteousness: the Messiah, God’s righteous branch, becomes “the Lord our Righteousness.” Paradoxically, under the law no one could be crucified who was not guilty of sin (Dt 21:22). But it is Christ the righteous one who was crucified, thereby forever undermining any supposed legalistic confidence (Dt 21:23; Gal 3:13). More than forgiven, believers are deemed righteous in him (Jer 23:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>While the birthplace of the Messiah was well established (Mi 5:2), his deity was a hotly contested matter. Although few in ancient Israel disputed the belief in a superhuman Messiah, it is doubtful that anyone imagined him to be “God with us” in the fullest sense of the expression (cf. Heb 1:3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MessiahintheNewTestament\">Messiah in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The NT writers present the picture that he who was the child of supernatural origins (Is 7:14; Mi 5:2) carried the full weight of divinity (Is 9:6; Phil 2:6; Col 1:19). He is the Son of God, worthy to receive the worship of all people (Ps 45:6-7; cf. Heb 1:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>The Jews of first-century Palestine knew that the messianic promise would be fulfilled in the coming of one like Moses (Dt 18:18). Parallels between Jesus and Moses are abundant. As mediators, innovators, and propagators of new phases of spiritual life for the people, they are unexcelled. Specifically, both are miraculously spared in infancy (Ex 2; Mt 2:13-23); both renounce a royal court for the sake of serving the people of God (Phil 2:5-8; Heb 11:24-28); both exhibit intense compassion for others (Nm 27:17; Mt 9:36); both commune “face to face” with God (Ex 34:29-30; 2 Cor 3:7); and each mediates a covenant of redemption (Dt 29:1; Heb 8:6-7). But, as Luther observes, “Christ is no Moses.” In the final analysis Moses is but a household servant; the Messiah is the maker and master of all things (Heb 3:3-6; cf. Jn 1:1-2, 18).<\/p>\n<p>Family genealogies are important in Scripture. Rabbis agreed upon the absolute necessity of the Messiah’s Davidic lineage based on Hosea 3:5 and Jeremiah 30:9. The angelic announcement immediately establishes the correct lineage for Jesus (Lk 1:32-33; cf. 2:4), as does Matthew’s (Mt 1:1-17). The Lukan list, like that of Matthew, sets forth the exclusive kingly descent verifying Jesus as Messiah (Lk 3:23-38). Although variations occur between the two genealogies, there is a firm solidarity emphasizing an ancestry within the unique messianic stock. Fully aware of the messianic focus of Scripture (Jn 5:46; 8:56), Jesus acknowledged himself to be the Christ on numerous occasions. He accepted the title from blind Bartimaeus (Mk 10:46-48); from the crowds when he entered Jerusalem (Mt 21:9); from the children at the temple (v 15); and in other contexts as well (Mt 16:16-18; Mk 14:61-62; Lk 4:21; Jn 4:25-26). Nonetheless, he warned his disciples not to broadcast his mighty acts as Messiah prior to his resurrection (Mt 17:9; cf. Lk 9:20-21). Owing to the commonly held (but false) notion that the Messiah’s role was primarily that of a political liberator, Jesus actually avoided use of that term and preferred to identify himself as “the Son of Man.” It was by no means assumed that both designations referred to the same person (cf. Mk 14:61-62). Borrowing essentially from Daniel’s vision of a heavenly conqueror (Dn 7:13-14), Jesus consistently employed this less-known title and filled it with the true character and scope of messianic salvation. Jesus’ teaching in this regard enabled his disciples to correct their erroneous views concerning his mission (Mt 16:21-23). In the fullness of time they would come to see him not only as Messiah but also as the theme of the entire OT (Mt 5:17; Lk 24:27, 44; Jn 5:39; cf. Heb 10:7). When Jesus expounded the Scriptures beginning with the Torah (Lk 24:27), he did so as the living exegesis of God, the Word made flesh (Jn 1:14, 18). Legitimate messianic exposition is found in a host of texts, such as Psalms 2; 16; 22; 40; 110; Isaiah 7:14; 9:6; 11:1; 40:10-11; 50:6; 52:13–53:12; 61:1; 63:1-6; Jeremiah 23:5-6; 33:14-16; Ezekiel 34:23; 37:25; Daniel 9:24-27; Hosea 11:1; Micah 5:2; Zechariah 9:9; 11:13; 12:10; 13:7; Malachi 3:1; 4:2.<\/p>\n<p>The messiahship of Jesus is firmly proclaimed by all four evangelists (Mt 1:1; Mk 1:1; Lk 24:26; Jn 20:31). Peter on Pentecost, Philip before the Ethiopian eunuch, and Apollos in open debate all argue convincingly that Jesus is the Messiah (Acts 2:36; 8:35; 28:28). Peter says he was “made” both Lord and Christ (2:36), signifying that the resurrection rightfully confirms him as such. Similarly, the apostle Paul speaks of Jesus’ resurrection as a patent declaration of his inalienable right to the title (Rom 1:4). For the ex-Pharisee and former persecutor of the church, “Jesus the Christ” is the very heart and soul of Paul’s preaching. Nothing is worthy to be compared to the glory of the Messiah; everything pales by comparison (Phil 3:5-10). The apostle’s all-consuming passion is for others to know the fullness of God in the person of his only Son (Eph 3:14-19).<\/p>\n<p>The Holy Spirit in Scripture speaks of Jesus with wide-ranging appellatives—Holy One, Judge, Righteous One, King, Son of God, and Lord—but these are not exhaustive. In him all the lines of messianic prediction converge; he is the touchstone whereby their validity is firmly established. The Lord Jesus Christ is himself the heart and substance of that covenant through which sinful people may be reconciled to a holy God (Is 42:6; Jn 14:6). That Jesus is the Messiah of Israel, God incarnate, exhaustively fulfills prophecy, type, and symbol—all shadows of his coming. Therefore, all should trust in him, the source of all grace, the only abiding treasure (Mt 12:21; Jn 1:16-17; Col 2:3). Anointed as prophet, he leads us into all truth (Jn 6:14; 7:16); as priest he intercedes for us (Heb 7:21); and as king he reigns over us (Phil 2:9-10).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Branch; Christology; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Redeemer, Redemption; Son of God; Son of Man.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MESSIAH<\/h3>\n<p>Title derived from the Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiach<\/span><em>,<\/em> a verbal adjective meaning “anointed one.” Along with its NT equivalent, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> (Christ), it refers to an act of consecration whereby an individual is set apart to serve God and then anointed with oil. The verbal root <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashach<\/span><em>)<\/em> conveys this idea as well.<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s practice of ceremonially anointing with oil is present in several contexts. Priests were regularly anointed prior to their divinely given service at the altar of sacrifice (Lv 4:3). While there is evidence for a literal anointing of prophets (1 Kgs 19:16), this does not appear to have been a standard practice. The anointing of Saul and David by Samuel established the act as a significant prerequisite for Hebrew kings before they assumed their positions of royal leadership. The king was especially considered to be the Lord’s anointed and as such was viewed to hold a secure position before men (1 Sm 12:14; 2 Sm 19:21) and God (Pss 2:2; 20:6). Along with numerous messianic prophecies, these proceedings helped inform the Jews of the Anointed One, par excellence, who would eventually come to bring salvation to Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Concluding the 13 articles of Hebraic faith attributed to Moses Maimonides (13th century <span>AD<\/span>) is the statement still found in many Hebrew prayer books: “I believe with a perfect heart that the Messiah will come; and although his coming be delayed, I will still wait patiently for his speedy appearance.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MessiahintheOldTestament\">Messiah in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Jewish hope for the advent of the Messiah developed dynamically from the period of David’s reign, when it was prophesied that his kingdom would endure to the end of time (2 Sm 7:16). Israel was told that, through David’s descendants, his throne would exert a never-ending dominion over all the earth (2 Sm 22:48-51; Jer 33). It is with this aspect of messianic salvation that Jewish minds have traditionally been preoccupied (cf. Acts 1:6).<\/p>\n<p>Among Orthodox rabbis there has never been a lack of conjecture respecting the details of the Messiah’s ministry. At one time the rabbis applied no less than 456 passages of Scripture to his person and salvation. Preoccupation with the Messiah is evident in the tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> (Babylonian Talmud), where passages state that the world was created for him and that all the prophets prophesied of his days (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 98b, 99a). By and large, Orthodoxy still retains its time-worn belief in the Messiah’s reign in Jerusalem, the rebuilding of the temple, and the reestablishment of both priesthood and sacrifice.<\/p>\n<p>While later Judaism looked for the Messiah as an eschatological figure who will reign at the end of time, modern Jewish thought has largely jettisoned the traditional notion of a personal Messiah in favor of belief in a messianic age. Prevalent liberal Judaism envisions the world ultimately perfected through the influence of the twin Judaic ideals of justice and compassion. Such conviction, ignoring the plight of fallen humans and the teaching of Scripture, substitutes humanistic thinking for miraculous heavenly intervention.<\/p>\n<p>While the Messiah’s origin is linked firmly to the house of David (2 Sm 7:14; Hos 3:5), the promise for a Messiah was given long before David lived. In fact, the hope for the Messiah is implicit in the first promise of the establishment of the kingdom of God. Addressed to Satan, Genesis 3:15 declares that God will place hostility between the serpent and the woman until, in the fullness of time, the “seed” of the woman inflicts a fatal blow to the head of the serpent.<\/p>\n<p>The nature of messianic prophecy is progressive; each prophecy casts more light on the subject. This occurs, for example, respecting the concept of the “seed”: Messiah is to be born of a woman (Gn 3:15), through the line of Shem (9:26) and specifically through Abraham (22:18). Yet even as late as Genesis 22:18, the “seed” is not clearly presented as a person, since <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">zerah<\/span> (seed) may indicate a singular or plural object. Still less apparent in these early stages of messianic prophecy is the nature of the “bruising” that is to occur. Yet the idea of the Messiah being crushed for sin is implicit in the Genesis pronouncement, as is the violence associated with that act. Chief among the messianic prophets, Isaiah gives full range to the axiom that the Anointed One must endure extensive suffering (Is 53:1). Under the figure “the Servant of the Lord,” four “servant songs” delineate the mission of the future deliverer (Is 42:1-7; 49:1-9; 50:4-11; 52:13–53:12). While it is true that Isaiah does not explicitly link the title Messiah with the Servant of the Lord, identifying both figures as one and the same person is justifiable. Both figures are uniquely anointed (61:1); each brings light to the Gentiles (55:4; cf. 49:6); neither is pretentious in his first appearance (7:14-15; 11:1; cf. 42:3; 53:1); and the title of Davidic “branch” rests upon them both (11:1-4). Equally significant are the dual facts of their humiliation and exaltation (49:7; 52:13-15). Jewish scholars of the early Christian era in the Aramaic Targum on the prophets paraphrase Isaiah 42:1, “Behold my Servant Messiah” and begin Isaiah 53, “Behold my Servant Messiah will prosper.” While Cyrus may be spoken of as “anointed,” no final salvific work is attributed to him (45:1-5). Israel, although elect and loved by God (41:8), is ill-equipped as God’s servant to bring his redeeming work to mankind (42:18). The collapse of David’s dynasty points eloquently to Israel’s need for an anointed monarch who will heal the apostasy and disobedience (Ex 33:5; Hos 4:1). More and more, OT history presents Israel’s comprehensive moral failure. Her problem, which she shares with mankind, can only be solved by the making of a covenant whose surety and focal point is both a personal Savior and sovereign Lord (Jer 31:31-34). The advent of such a champion lives in the recorded promise of a shoot from the stump of Jesse’s fallen tree, who will bring the light of life to God’s benighted people (Is 9:2; 11:1).<\/p>\n<p>It is difficult to get away from the idea that the concept of servanthood and lowliness belongs within the sphere of royalty (Zec 9:9). The concept of the Messiah filling the complementary offices of priest and king is incontrovertible (Ps 110:1-4); a suffering priest-king is far less obvious. Some among the Talmudic writers apparently recognized the likelihood that the Messiah would have to suffer. In the Babylonian Talmud, tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 98b, the Messiah is said to bear sicknesses and pain. Among the prayers for the Day of Atonement may be found the words of Eleazar ben Qalir (perhaps as late as <span>AD<\/span> 1000): “Our righteous Messiah has departed from us; we are horror-stricken, and there is none to justify us. Our iniquities and the yoke of our transgressions he carries, and is wounded for our transgressions. He bears on his shoulders our sins to find pardon for our iniquities. May we be healed by his stripes.” In a similar vein Rabbi Eliyya de Vidas writes, “The meaning of ‘He was wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities,’ is that since the Messiah bears our iniquities, which produce the effect of His being bruised, it follows that whosoever will not admit that the Messiah thus suffers for our iniquities must endure and suffer for them himself.” For all this, it is highly doubtful that anyone imagined the Messiah would accomplish his salvational work by means of his own death (cf. Is 53:12). When rabbinic speculation failed to satisfactorily harmonize the paradoxical facts of humiliation and exaltation, some hypothesized that God would send a Messiah to suffer as well as a Messiah to reign. Biblically, it is evident that the Anointed One’s terrible ordeal of suffering is but the necessary prelude to infinite glory. He is pictured not only as a great king (52:13; 53:12) but also as humble (53:2), humiliated (52:14), rejected (53:3), and bearing the consequences of mankind’s rebellion (vv 5-6). Yet he is raised up to intercede for, and richly bless, his people (v 12). The Messiah, having accomplished that full obedience that Adam and Israel failed to achieve, will bring Israel and the nations back to God (42:18-19; 49:3, 6).<\/p>\n<p>The writings of Daniel contain important messianic data. Daniel is unique in that he boldly speaks of “Messiah the Prince” (Dn 9:25), identifies him as the “Son of Man” (7:13), and says he suffers (“cut off,” 9:26). This statement of the cutting off (i.e., death) of the Messiah makes possible his work of atonement (9:24). The doctrine of a vicarious substitutionary atonement is the only doctrine of atonement found in the Bible (cf. Lv 17:11). Israel understood that to bear sin meant enduring the consequences, or penalty, for sin (cf. Nm 14:33). The same penal substitution is evident in the working principle of the Messiah’s atoning sacrifice. He is the victim’s substitute to whom is transferred the suffering due the sinner. The penalty having been thus borne vicariously, the suppliant is fully pardoned.<\/p>\n<p>Psalm 22:1 records the plaintive cry of the Messiah bearing man’s penalty for sin (cf. Mt 27:46) as he becomes sin on behalf of his people (2 Cor 5:21). Yet his cry, “My God,” indicates an intimate relationship that cannot be radically severed. Once again the motif of messianic humiliation prior to great exaltation is in view (Ps 22:27). In the so-called “royal psalms” (e.g., 2; 72; 110) it is the priestly intercessor who is also ordained to function as monarch and judge.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah brings the portrait a step further. The one who will enable humans to enter into a salvational covenant with God conveys God’s imputed righteousness: the Messiah, God’s righteous branch, becomes “the Lord our Righteousness.” Paradoxically, under the law no one could be crucified who was not guilty of sin (Dt 21:22). But it is Christ the righteous one who was crucified, thereby forever undermining any supposed legalistic confidence (Dt 21:23; Gal 3:13). More than forgiven, believers are deemed righteous in him (Jer 23:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>While the birthplace of the Messiah was well established (Mi 5:2), his deity was a hotly contested matter. Although few in ancient Israel disputed the belief in a superhuman Messiah, it is doubtful that anyone imagined him to be “God with us” in the fullest sense of the expression (cf. Heb 1:3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MessiahintheNewTestament\">Messiah in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The NT writers present the picture that he who was the child of supernatural origins (Is 7:14; Mi 5:2) carried the full weight of divinity (Is 9:6; Phil 2:6; Col 1:19). He is the Son of God, worthy to receive the worship of all people (Ps 45:6-7; cf. Heb 1:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>The Jews of first-century Palestine knew that the messianic promise would be fulfilled in the coming of one like Moses (Dt 18:18). Parallels between Jesus and Moses are abundant. As mediators, innovators, and propagators of new phases of spiritual life for the people, they are unexcelled. Specifically, both are miraculously spared in infancy (Ex 2; Mt 2:13-23); both renounce a royal court for the sake of serving the people of God (Phil 2:5-8; Heb 11:24-28); both exhibit intense compassion for others (Nm 27:17; Mt 9:36); both commune “face to face” with God (Ex 34:29-30; 2 Cor 3:7); and each mediates a covenant of redemption (Dt 29:1; Heb 8:6-7). But, as Luther observes, “Christ is no Moses.” In the final analysis Moses is but a household servant; the Messiah is the maker and master of all things (Heb 3:3-6; cf. Jn 1:1-2, 18).<\/p>\n<p>Family genealogies are important in Scripture. Rabbis agreed upon the absolute necessity of the Messiah’s Davidic lineage based on Hosea 3:5 and Jeremiah 30:9. The angelic announcement immediately establishes the correct lineage for Jesus (Lk 1:32-33; cf. 2:4), as does Matthew’s (Mt 1:1-17). The Lukan list, like that of Matthew, sets forth the exclusive kingly descent verifying Jesus as Messiah (Lk 3:23-38). Although variations occur between the two genealogies, there is a firm solidarity emphasizing an ancestry within the unique messianic stock. Fully aware of the messianic focus of Scripture (Jn 5:46; 8:56), Jesus acknowledged himself to be the Christ on numerous occasions. He accepted the title from blind Bartimaeus (Mk 10:46-48); from the crowds when he entered Jerusalem (Mt 21:9); from the children at the temple (v 15); and in other contexts as well (Mt 16:16-18; Mk 14:61-62; Lk 4:21; Jn 4:25-26). Nonetheless, he warned his disciples not to broadcast his mighty acts as Messiah prior to his resurrection (Mt 17:9; cf. Lk 9:20-21). Owing to the commonly held (but false) notion that the Messiah’s role was primarily that of a political liberator, Jesus actually avoided use of that term and preferred to identify himself as “the Son of Man.” It was by no means assumed that both designations referred to the same person (cf. Mk 14:61-62). Borrowing essentially from Daniel’s vision of a heavenly conqueror (Dn 7:13-14), Jesus consistently employed this less-known title and filled it with the true character and scope of messianic salvation. Jesus’ teaching in this regard enabled his disciples to correct their erroneous views concerning his mission (Mt 16:21-23). In the fullness of time they would come to see him not only as Messiah but also as the theme of the entire OT (Mt 5:17; Lk 24:27, 44; Jn 5:39; cf. Heb 10:7). When Jesus expounded the Scriptures beginning with the Torah (Lk 24:27), he did so as the living exegesis of God, the Word made flesh (Jn 1:14, 18). Legitimate messianic exposition is found in a host of texts, such as Psalms 2; 16; 22; 40; 110; Isaiah 7:14; 9:6; 11:1; 40:10-11; 50:6; 52:13–53:12; 61:1; 63:1-6; Jeremiah 23:5-6; 33:14-16; Ezekiel 34:23; 37:25; Daniel 9:24-27; Hosea 11:1; Micah 5:2; Zechariah 9:9; 11:13; 12:10; 13:7; Malachi 3:1; 4:2.<\/p>\n<p>The messiahship of Jesus is firmly proclaimed by all four evangelists (Mt 1:1; Mk 1:1; Lk 24:26; Jn 20:31). Peter on Pentecost, Philip before the Ethiopian eunuch, and Apollos in open debate all argue convincingly that Jesus is the Messiah (Acts 2:36; 8:35; 28:28). Peter says he was “made” both Lord and Christ (2:36), signifying that the resurrection rightfully confirms him as such. Similarly, the apostle Paul speaks of Jesus’ resurrection as a patent declaration of his inalienable right to the title (Rom 1:4). For the ex-Pharisee and former persecutor of the church, “Jesus the Christ” is the very heart and soul of Paul’s preaching. Nothing is worthy to be compared to the glory of the Messiah; everything pales by comparison (Phil 3:5-10). The apostle’s all-consuming passion is for others to know the fullness of God in the person of his only Son (Eph 3:14-19).<\/p>\n<p>The Holy Spirit in Scripture speaks of Jesus with wide-ranging appellatives—Holy One, Judge, Righteous One, King, Son of God, and Lord—but these are not exhaustive. In him all the lines of messianic prediction converge; he is the touchstone whereby their validity is firmly established. The Lord Jesus Christ is himself the heart and substance of that covenant through which sinful people may be reconciled to a holy God (Is 42:6; Jn 14:6). That Jesus is the Messiah of Israel, God incarnate, exhaustively fulfills prophecy, type, and symbol—all shadows of his coming. Therefore, all should trust in him, the source of all grace, the only abiding treasure (Mt 12:21; Jn 1:16-17; Col 2:3). Anointed as prophet, he leads us into all truth (Jn 6:14; 7:16); as priest he intercedes for us (Heb 7:21); and as king he reigns over us (Phil 2:9-10).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Branch; Christology; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Redeemer, Redemption; Son of God; Son of Man.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MESSIAH Title derived from the Hebrew, mashiach, a verbal adjective meaning “anointed one.” Along with its NT equivalent, christos (Christ), it refers to an act of consecration whereby an individual is set apart to serve God and then anointed with oil. The verbal root (mashach) conveys this idea as well. Israel’s practice of ceremonially anointing with oil is present in several contexts. Priests were regularly anointed prior to their divinely given service at the altar of sacrifice (Lv 4:3). ...","summary_en":"MESSIAH Title derived from the Hebrew, mashiach, a verbal adjective meaning “anointed one.” Along with its NT equivalent, christos (Christ), it refers to an act of consecration whereby an individual is set apart to serve God and then anointed with oil. The verbal root (mashach) conveys this idea as well. Israel’s practice of ceremonially anointing with oil is present in several contexts. Priests were regularly anointed prior to their divinely given service at the altar of sacrifice (Lv 4:3). ...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":28469,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Begotten*, Only","title_en":"Begotten*, Only","content_ro":"<h3>ONLY BEGOTTEN*<\/h3>\n<p>Phrase deeply entrenched in Christian language as descriptive of Jesus. The word traditionally translated “only begotten” does not carry the idea of birth at all. Literally, it means “only one of its kind,” “unique.” This can be readily seen in the way it is used in the NT and in the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the OT).<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word for this phrase appears nine times in the NT, but only five of these occurrences, all from the Johannine writings, make reference to Jesus (Jn 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18; 1 Jn 4:9). Three of the other occurrences are of an only son or daughter (Lk 7:12; 8:42; 9:38; cf. Jgs 11:34 in the LXX). Because of its frequent use for an only child, the word often conveys the idea of something especially favored or precious. The remaining non-Johannine reference, in Hebrews 11:17, is to Isaac as Abraham’s “favored” or “unique” son. Isaac was not Abraham’s “only begotten,” since he had other children, but Isaac was his favored and unique son fulfilling God’s promise. In the Septuagint for Psalm 22:20 and 35:17, the psalmist, in his plea for deliverance, even uses this word of his own soul as that which is of great value. The Hebrew word that stands behind each of these OT texts also means “only” and does not carry any idea of birth.<\/p>\n<p>Where the word is used of Jesus, its meaning is likewise not “only begotten” but “only” or “unique.” The word is used with “son” and should be understood as God’s <em>only<\/em> Son, indicating both God’s favor toward him and his uniqueness (Jn 3:16, 18; 1 Jn 4:9). The statement at the baptism and transfiguration of Jesus in the Synoptics (“This is my beloved son”) expresses virtually the same idea. In fact, the word “beloved” is used in the Septuagint as an equivalent to the word “only” to translate the same Hebrew word. In John 1:14 the word “only” is used by itself to stress that the incarnate Word comes as a unique one from the Father. The final reference (Jn 1:18) is especially interesting because of the fact that some texts read “the only son” while others read “the only God.” Because scribes could easily have written “only son” due to their familiarity with the other texts in John and because of the superiority of the texts that read “only God,” this latter reading is preferred. The attitude expressed toward the incarnate Word is the highest possible. No one has ever seen God, but the unique (or only) God who is in the bosom of the Father has revealed him.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ONLY BEGOTTEN*<\/h3>\n<p>Phrase deeply entrenched in Christian language as descriptive of Jesus. The word traditionally translated “only begotten” does not carry the idea of birth at all. Literally, it means “only one of its kind,” “unique.” This can be readily seen in the way it is used in the NT and in the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the OT).<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word for this phrase appears nine times in the NT, but only five of these occurrences, all from the Johannine writings, make reference to Jesus (Jn 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18; 1 Jn 4:9). Three of the other occurrences are of an only son or daughter (Lk 7:12; 8:42; 9:38; cf. Jgs 11:34 in the LXX). Because of its frequent use for an only child, the word often conveys the idea of something especially favored or precious. The remaining non-Johannine reference, in Hebrews 11:17, is to Isaac as Abraham’s “favored” or “unique” son. Isaac was not Abraham’s “only begotten,” since he had other children, but Isaac was his favored and unique son fulfilling God’s promise. In the Septuagint for Psalm 22:20 and 35:17, the psalmist, in his plea for deliverance, even uses this word of his own soul as that which is of great value. The Hebrew word that stands behind each of these OT texts also means “only” and does not carry any idea of birth.<\/p>\n<p>Where the word is used of Jesus, its meaning is likewise not “only begotten” but “only” or “unique.” The word is used with “son” and should be understood as God’s <em>only<\/em> Son, indicating both God’s favor toward him and his uniqueness (Jn 3:16, 18; 1 Jn 4:9). The statement at the baptism and transfiguration of Jesus in the Synoptics (“This is my beloved son”) expresses virtually the same idea. In fact, the word “beloved” is used in the Septuagint as an equivalent to the word “only” to translate the same Hebrew word. In John 1:14 the word “only” is used by itself to stress that the incarnate Word comes as a unique one from the Father. The final reference (Jn 1:18) is especially interesting because of the fact that some texts read “the only son” while others read “the only God.” Because scribes could easily have written “only son” due to their familiarity with the other texts in John and because of the superiority of the texts that read “only God,” this latter reading is preferred. The attitude expressed toward the incarnate Word is the highest possible. No one has ever seen God, but the unique (or only) God who is in the bosom of the Father has revealed him.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ONLY BEGOTTEN* Phrase deeply entrenched in Christian language as descriptive of Jesus. The word traditionally translated “only begotten” does not carry the idea of birth at all. Literally, it means “only one of its kind,” “unique.” This can be readily seen in the way it is used in the NT and in the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the OT). The Greek word for this phrase appears nine times in the NT, but only five of these occurrences, all from the Johannine writings, make reference to Jes...","summary_en":"ONLY BEGOTTEN* Phrase deeply entrenched in Christian language as descriptive of Jesus. The word traditionally translated “only begotten” does not carry the idea of birth at all. Literally, it means “only one of its kind,” “unique.” This can be readily seen in the way it is used in the NT and in the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the OT). The Greek word for this phrase appears nine times in the NT, but only five of these occurrences, all from the Johannine writings, make reference to Jes...","source":"Articles\/O.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":31235,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"the Presence of God","title_en":"the Presence of God","content_ro":"<h3>PRESENCE OF GOD, T<span>he<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>God’s manifestation of his spiritual being. Since God is spirit, believers experience him by sensing his invisible presence. God also makes himself known in other ways. He appears in nature, particularly in catastrophic forces—fire, lightning, and earthquake (1 Kgs 19:11-13). He also appears in human form (Gn 18; 32:22-32). So God, who cannot be seen, has chosen ways to reveal himself.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<h5>The Angel of the Lord<\/h5>\n<p>The angel of the Lord was God’s emissary and Israel’s special helper, although it is not said that the same angel is meant in every instance (Ex 14:19; 23:20; 33:2). After the angel vanishes, Hagar insists that she had seen God himself (Gn 16:13). In Jacob’s experience the angel identifies himself with God (31:11-13); while in Genesis 21:18, 22:11, Numbers 22:35, the “I” of deity signified God’s presence in the angel. There is also oscillation between God and the angel in Exodus 12:23 and Genesis 48:15-16. Here God was temporarily incarnating himself within the form of the angel, assuring his own that he was immediately present with them.<\/p>\n<h5>The Glory of God<\/h5>\n<p>Glory is what God possesses in his own right, a visible extension of his nature, a “concrete” form of his divine presence. The heavens are a visible form of God’s presence (Pss 8; 19:1-6; 136:5), for they are his glory. The glory that appeared to Israel as devouring fire on Sinai (Ex 29:43) filled the tabernacle (40:34-38). By it God consecrated the tabernacle as the place of his presence. In Isaiah 6 the glory appears as the normal expression of the divine presence. In Ezekiel the glory is identical with God (Ez 9:3-4). Throughout the OT the glory of God is the transcendent God making his presence and nearness visible to his own.<\/p>\n<h5>The Face of God<\/h5>\n<p>In the OT “presence” is used to represent the Hebrew word for “face”; when “face” is conjoined with a preposition, it means “in the presence of.” In Genesis 32:30 Jacob saw God “face to face.” A man’s personality and character are made visible on his face. In this sense a man’s face is the man. So, “the angel of his presence [face]” (Is 63:9) may mean “the angel who is his face,” since the prophet may have intended the identification. The face of God is the revelation of the grace of God. So, when he hides his face, he is withholding his grace. But when he makes his face shine (Ps 31:16), there is blessing (44:3). The face of God, then, is the presence of God (Ex 33:14). To pray to God in a holy place was to “seek God’s face” (Ps 24:6), his personal presence. Indeed, this sums up temple worship and private prayer in Israel (63:1-3; 100:2). The blessing of God consisted in his face shining upon them (Nm 6:25; Ps 80:3, 7, 19).<\/p>\n<h5>The Name of God<\/h5>\n<p>Among Semites, the equation of the name and the person was a common idea. So also, the name of God was an interchangeable term for God himself, a symbol of his activity in revelation. The linking of man’s worship of God with the divine name of God was the medium of his operation (Pss 44:5; 89:24; Is 30:27), a designation for the power of God that radiates help and energy universally. God could act by his name. The angel of the Lord’s authority and power functioned because God’s name was in him (Ex 23:20-21). As bearer of the divine name, he made real the hidden presence of God. The temple was the dwelling place of the name (1 Kgs 11:36), not only because God’s name was invoked there but also because God’s presence—God himself—dwelt there.<\/p>\n<h5>The Spirit of God<\/h5>\n<p>In the Holy Spirit the transcendent God draws near to his people. The Spirit is the medium through whom God’s presence becomes real among his people (Is 63:11-14; Zec 7:12) and by whom God’s gifts and powers operate among them (2 Chr 15:1; 20:14; 24:20; Zec 4:6; 6:1-8). The Spirit was the presence and power of God with his people—God himself acting in accordance with his essential nature. The sinner cannot be in the presence of God without the aid of God’s Holy Spirit; to be deprived of the Holy Spirit is to be deprived of God’s presence (Ps 51:11). Without the Spirit, communion between God and humans is not possible.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the NT a new mode of God’s presence is revealed. It is in Jesus Christ the incarnate Word that God is present among his own (Jn 1:14-18; 17:6, 26). Jesus’ mission was to reveal God to humanity. This he did through his whole life’s work as well as through his words. His revelation of the name of God was expressed in his own name—Jesus (“The Lord Is Salvation”). And in the person of Jesus the function of the name of God found fulfillment. Christ was the new temple (Jn 1:14; 2:21; Col 2:9). He was the locus of the tabernacling presence of God. But that was only a first installment of the unveiling of God’s presence.<\/p>\n<p>The church now constitutes the temple of God in the NT. Christianity is essentially the religion of the presence of God and of communion with God. The body of Christ, “the spiritual temple” (Eph 2:22), made of “living stones” (1 Pt 2:5), is the residence of the presence of the glorious God.<\/p>\n<p>And now, the individual Christian is also a temple of God (1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16). God is especially present in the Christian’s spirit; there God reigns, for there is his kingdom; there he is worshiped, for there his glory and his presence have consecrated the inner being into a temple (see Jn 14:23).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Being and Attributes of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PRESENCE OF GOD, T<span>he<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>God’s manifestation of his spiritual being. Since God is spirit, believers experience him by sensing his invisible presence. God also makes himself known in other ways. He appears in nature, particularly in catastrophic forces—fire, lightning, and earthquake (1 Kgs 19:11-13). He also appears in human form (Gn 18; 32:22-32). So God, who cannot be seen, has chosen ways to reveal himself.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<h5>The Angel of the Lord<\/h5>\n<p>The angel of the Lord was God’s emissary and Israel’s special helper, although it is not said that the same angel is meant in every instance (Ex 14:19; 23:20; 33:2). After the angel vanishes, Hagar insists that she had seen God himself (Gn 16:13). In Jacob’s experience the angel identifies himself with God (31:11-13); while in Genesis 21:18, 22:11, Numbers 22:35, the “I” of deity signified God’s presence in the angel. There is also oscillation between God and the angel in Exodus 12:23 and Genesis 48:15-16. Here God was temporarily incarnating himself within the form of the angel, assuring his own that he was immediately present with them.<\/p>\n<h5>The Glory of God<\/h5>\n<p>Glory is what God possesses in his own right, a visible extension of his nature, a “concrete” form of his divine presence. The heavens are a visible form of God’s presence (Pss 8; 19:1-6; 136:5), for they are his glory. The glory that appeared to Israel as devouring fire on Sinai (Ex 29:43) filled the tabernacle (40:34-38). By it God consecrated the tabernacle as the place of his presence. In Isaiah 6 the glory appears as the normal expression of the divine presence. In Ezekiel the glory is identical with God (Ez 9:3-4). Throughout the OT the glory of God is the transcendent God making his presence and nearness visible to his own.<\/p>\n<h5>The Face of God<\/h5>\n<p>In the OT “presence” is used to represent the Hebrew word for “face”; when “face” is conjoined with a preposition, it means “in the presence of.” In Genesis 32:30 Jacob saw God “face to face.” A man’s personality and character are made visible on his face. In this sense a man’s face is the man. So, “the angel of his presence [face]” (Is 63:9) may mean “the angel who is his face,” since the prophet may have intended the identification. The face of God is the revelation of the grace of God. So, when he hides his face, he is withholding his grace. But when he makes his face shine (Ps 31:16), there is blessing (44:3). The face of God, then, is the presence of God (Ex 33:14). To pray to God in a holy place was to “seek God’s face” (Ps 24:6), his personal presence. Indeed, this sums up temple worship and private prayer in Israel (63:1-3; 100:2). The blessing of God consisted in his face shining upon them (Nm 6:25; Ps 80:3, 7, 19).<\/p>\n<h5>The Name of God<\/h5>\n<p>Among Semites, the equation of the name and the person was a common idea. So also, the name of God was an interchangeable term for God himself, a symbol of his activity in revelation. The linking of man’s worship of God with the divine name of God was the medium of his operation (Pss 44:5; 89:24; Is 30:27), a designation for the power of God that radiates help and energy universally. God could act by his name. The angel of the Lord’s authority and power functioned because God’s name was in him (Ex 23:20-21). As bearer of the divine name, he made real the hidden presence of God. The temple was the dwelling place of the name (1 Kgs 11:36), not only because God’s name was invoked there but also because God’s presence—God himself—dwelt there.<\/p>\n<h5>The Spirit of God<\/h5>\n<p>In the Holy Spirit the transcendent God draws near to his people. The Spirit is the medium through whom God’s presence becomes real among his people (Is 63:11-14; Zec 7:12) and by whom God’s gifts and powers operate among them (2 Chr 15:1; 20:14; 24:20; Zec 4:6; 6:1-8). The Spirit was the presence and power of God with his people—God himself acting in accordance with his essential nature. The sinner cannot be in the presence of God without the aid of God’s Holy Spirit; to be deprived of the Holy Spirit is to be deprived of God’s presence (Ps 51:11). Without the Spirit, communion between God and humans is not possible.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the NT a new mode of God’s presence is revealed. It is in Jesus Christ the incarnate Word that God is present among his own (Jn 1:14-18; 17:6, 26). Jesus’ mission was to reveal God to humanity. This he did through his whole life’s work as well as through his words. His revelation of the name of God was expressed in his own name—Jesus (“The Lord Is Salvation”). And in the person of Jesus the function of the name of God found fulfillment. Christ was the new temple (Jn 1:14; 2:21; Col 2:9). He was the locus of the tabernacling presence of God. But that was only a first installment of the unveiling of God’s presence.<\/p>\n<p>The church now constitutes the temple of God in the NT. Christianity is essentially the religion of the presence of God and of communion with God. The body of Christ, “the spiritual temple” (Eph 2:22), made of “living stones” (1 Pt 2:5), is the residence of the presence of the glorious God.<\/p>\n<p>And now, the individual Christian is also a temple of God (1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16). God is especially present in the Christian’s spirit; there God reigns, for there is his kingdom; there he is worshiped, for there his glory and his presence have consecrated the inner being into a temple (see Jn 14:23).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Being and Attributes of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PRESENCE OF GOD, The God’s manifestation of his spiritual being. Since God is spirit, believers experience him by sensing his invisible presence. God also makes himself known in other ways. He appears in nature, particularly in catastrophic forces—fire, lightning, and earthquake (1 Kgs 19:11-13). He also appears in human form (Gn 18; 32:22-32). So God, who cannot be seen, has chosen ways to reveal himself. In the Old Testament The Angel of the Lord The angel of the Lord was God’s emissary and...","summary_en":"PRESENCE OF GOD, The God’s manifestation of his spiritual being. Since God is spirit, believers experience him by sensing his invisible presence. God also makes himself known in other ways. He appears in nature, particularly in catastrophic forces—fire, lightning, and earthquake (1 Kgs 19:11-13). He also appears in human form (Gn 18; 32:22-32). So God, who cannot be seen, has chosen ways to reveal himself. In the Old Testament The Angel of the Lord The angel of the Lord was God’s emissary and...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":32910,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Revelation","title_en":"Revelation","content_ro":"<h3>REVELATION<\/h3>\n<p>Term from the Latin <em>revelatio,<\/em> referring to either (1) the act of revealing for the purpose of making something known or (2) the thing that is revealed. In theology it designates God’s own self-disclosure or manifesting of himself, or things concerning himself and the world; it may also mean the word itself, oral or written, that conveys such revelation. The equivalent NT terms are <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">apokalupsis<\/span> (apocalypse), which means unveiling, uncovering, or making someone or something known. The Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">phanerosis<\/span> is virtually synonymous, though usually with the nuance of clear, readily discernible presentation.<\/p>\n<p>Rationalistic philosophy (as promoted by René Descartes, Immanuel Kant, J. G. Fichte, F. W. J. von Schelling, G. W. F. Hegel) finds in human reason the sole source for whatever shape revelation takes or is, acknowledging only natural religion and denying the reality of all supernatural divine revelation. Rationalists may at times admit the possibility of supernatural religion, but they cannot conceive of divine intervention.<\/p>\n<p>Christian theology, on the other hand, is committed to the idea that the principle of knowledge is the Word of God, specifically the Scripture, despite the severe critique of higher criticism against any claim that the Scripture affords a secure, reliable, and independent base for theological truth. Modern critical theology has declared its support for what it calls “scientific theology,” for the “sure” judgments of natural science and the supposed improbability of all supernatural happenings. This has forced the Scripture, as the inspired Word of God, out of its authoritative, normative position. What the Scripture contains is not the account of what actually happened, or what God actually said or did, but merely the early church’s confession of faith as to what first-century followers of Christ supposed or contrived to have happened. The Bible, therefore, is not unique in its divine origin; it is only the unique product of early religious searchings and strivings.<\/p>\n<p>Christian theology, on the other hand, asserts (on the basis of the scriptural text and the confirming mighty acts of God) that divine revelation is the first, last, and only source for theology. People have knowledge of God because of God’s initiative and activity. God is always the initiator and author of revelation; people are the recipients. God discloses what otherwise would be unknown; he uncovers what otherwise would be hidden (Dt 29:29; Gal 1:12; Eph 3:3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GeneralRevelation\">General Revelation<\/p>\n<p>God draws back the veil in a twofold manner. There is first of all what has come to be called “general revelation.” God reveals himself in nature, in history, and in all people as made in his image. The association of God’s revelation with nature, by which people have an intuitive knowledge of God’s existence, is of long standing and is a truth supported throughout Scripture—both in the OT (Pss 10:11; 14:1, 19:1) and in the NT (Acts 14:17; 17:22-29; Rom 1:19-21). That there is a God, that God is the Creator with almighty power, that God deals justly as the supreme Judge, or rules as the “wholly other” over his creatures—these things are known and recognized by many people. Thus, the fact that God <em>is,<\/em> is undeniable. So, when people deny God’s existence, as do atheists, it is a forced effort against an inner conviction worked by nature itself. Paul could expect concurrence from the Athenians when he asserted that it is in God, the one and only true God, that all people live and move and have their being (Acts 17:28). Knowing God through nature, however, is not the end of revelation. Full and complete revelation comes when people encounter the personhood of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SpecialRevelation\">Special Revelation<\/p>\n<p>To know God from his revelation in nature still leaves him and his gracious purposes completely unknown. The gracious, loving heart of God intends the salvation of all people. By special revelation God purposes to share this with mankind in various ways. Mankind would know nothing at all of God’s messianic purposes in Christ, if God had not revealed his heart and purposes throughout Scripture. By inner, immediate illumination of their hearts and minds by God, the prophets and apostles spoke his Word as he gave them utterance (Jer 1:4-19; 1 Cor 2:13; 1 Thes 2:13; 2 Pt 1:16-21). The zenith of God’s revelation was the coming in flesh of his beloved Son, Jesus Christ (Jn 1:14-18; Gal 4:4-5; Heb 1:1-2). Jesus’ revelation of the Father and the Father’s gracious will toward all people was direct, accurate, and preeminent (Jn 14).<\/p>\n<p>God did not merely illuminate the hearts and minds of his prophets and apostles to speak his Word, but in specific instances also inspired them to record in writing the thoughts, words, and promises that he wanted revealed and retained for all time. The sacred collection of writings forms a remarkably harmonious and unified whole by which God reveals his thoughts and purposes toward humanity. For this writing, the prophets and apostles were prompted to recount not only certain historical events and happenings but also what God revealed for special communication. The ultimate purpose of Scripture is to reveal Christ. To him all Scripture gives witness (Jn 5:39; 10:35; Acts 10:43; 18:28; 1 Cor 15:3).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bible, Inspiration of the.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>REVELATION<\/h3>\n<p>Term from the Latin <em>revelatio,<\/em> referring to either (1) the act of revealing for the purpose of making something known or (2) the thing that is revealed. In theology it designates God’s own self-disclosure or manifesting of himself, or things concerning himself and the world; it may also mean the word itself, oral or written, that conveys such revelation. The equivalent NT terms are <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">apokalupsis<\/span> (apocalypse), which means unveiling, uncovering, or making someone or something known. The Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">phanerosis<\/span> is virtually synonymous, though usually with the nuance of clear, readily discernible presentation.<\/p>\n<p>Rationalistic philosophy (as promoted by René Descartes, Immanuel Kant, J. G. Fichte, F. W. J. von Schelling, G. W. F. Hegel) finds in human reason the sole source for whatever shape revelation takes or is, acknowledging only natural religion and denying the reality of all supernatural divine revelation. Rationalists may at times admit the possibility of supernatural religion, but they cannot conceive of divine intervention.<\/p>\n<p>Christian theology, on the other hand, is committed to the idea that the principle of knowledge is the Word of God, specifically the Scripture, despite the severe critique of higher criticism against any claim that the Scripture affords a secure, reliable, and independent base for theological truth. Modern critical theology has declared its support for what it calls “scientific theology,” for the “sure” judgments of natural science and the supposed improbability of all supernatural happenings. This has forced the Scripture, as the inspired Word of God, out of its authoritative, normative position. What the Scripture contains is not the account of what actually happened, or what God actually said or did, but merely the early church’s confession of faith as to what first-century followers of Christ supposed or contrived to have happened. The Bible, therefore, is not unique in its divine origin; it is only the unique product of early religious searchings and strivings.<\/p>\n<p>Christian theology, on the other hand, asserts (on the basis of the scriptural text and the confirming mighty acts of God) that divine revelation is the first, last, and only source for theology. People have knowledge of God because of God’s initiative and activity. God is always the initiator and author of revelation; people are the recipients. God discloses what otherwise would be unknown; he uncovers what otherwise would be hidden (Dt 29:29; Gal 1:12; Eph 3:3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GeneralRevelation\">General Revelation<\/p>\n<p>God draws back the veil in a twofold manner. There is first of all what has come to be called “general revelation.” God reveals himself in nature, in history, and in all people as made in his image. The association of God’s revelation with nature, by which people have an intuitive knowledge of God’s existence, is of long standing and is a truth supported throughout Scripture—both in the OT (Pss 10:11; 14:1, 19:1) and in the NT (Acts 14:17; 17:22-29; Rom 1:19-21). That there is a God, that God is the Creator with almighty power, that God deals justly as the supreme Judge, or rules as the “wholly other” over his creatures—these things are known and recognized by many people. Thus, the fact that God <em>is,<\/em> is undeniable. So, when people deny God’s existence, as do atheists, it is a forced effort against an inner conviction worked by nature itself. Paul could expect concurrence from the Athenians when he asserted that it is in God, the one and only true God, that all people live and move and have their being (Acts 17:28). Knowing God through nature, however, is not the end of revelation. Full and complete revelation comes when people encounter the personhood of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SpecialRevelation\">Special Revelation<\/p>\n<p>To know God from his revelation in nature still leaves him and his gracious purposes completely unknown. The gracious, loving heart of God intends the salvation of all people. By special revelation God purposes to share this with mankind in various ways. Mankind would know nothing at all of God’s messianic purposes in Christ, if God had not revealed his heart and purposes throughout Scripture. By inner, immediate illumination of their hearts and minds by God, the prophets and apostles spoke his Word as he gave them utterance (Jer 1:4-19; 1 Cor 2:13; 1 Thes 2:13; 2 Pt 1:16-21). The zenith of God’s revelation was the coming in flesh of his beloved Son, Jesus Christ (Jn 1:14-18; Gal 4:4-5; Heb 1:1-2). Jesus’ revelation of the Father and the Father’s gracious will toward all people was direct, accurate, and preeminent (Jn 14).<\/p>\n<p>God did not merely illuminate the hearts and minds of his prophets and apostles to speak his Word, but in specific instances also inspired them to record in writing the thoughts, words, and promises that he wanted revealed and retained for all time. The sacred collection of writings forms a remarkably harmonious and unified whole by which God reveals his thoughts and purposes toward humanity. For this writing, the prophets and apostles were prompted to recount not only certain historical events and happenings but also what God revealed for special communication. The ultimate purpose of Scripture is to reveal Christ. To him all Scripture gives witness (Jn 5:39; 10:35; Acts 10:43; 18:28; 1 Cor 15:3).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bible, Inspiration of the.<\/p>","summary_ro":"REVELATION Term from the Latin revelatio, referring to either (1) the act of revealing for the purpose of making something known or (2) the thing that is revealed. In theology it designates God’s own self-disclosure or manifesting of himself, or things concerning himself and the world; it may also mean the word itself, oral or written, that conveys such revelation. The equivalent NT terms are apokalupsis (apocalypse), which means unveiling, uncovering, or making someone or something known. Th...","summary_en":"REVELATION Term from the Latin revelatio, referring to either (1) the act of revealing for the purpose of making something known or (2) the thing that is revealed. In theology it designates God’s own self-disclosure or manifesting of himself, or things concerning himself and the world; it may also mean the word itself, oral or written, that conveys such revelation. The equivalent NT terms are apokalupsis (apocalypse), which means unveiling, uncovering, or making someone or something known. Th...","source":"Articles\/R.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":34802,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Shekinah*","title_en":"Shekinah*","content_ro":"<h3>SHEKINAH*<\/h3>\n<p>Transliteration of a Hebrew word meaning “the one who dwells” or “that which dwells.” The term enters Christian theology from its use in the Targums and rabbinic literature to describe the immanent presence in the world of the transcendent Deity. Although the word is not itself used in either Testament, it clearly originates in OT passages that describe God as dwelling among a people or in a particular place (Gn 9:27; Ex 25:8; 29:45-46; Nm 5:3; 1 Kgs 6:13; Pss 68:16-18; 74:2; Is 8:18; Ez 43:7-9; Jl 3:17, 21; Zec 2:10-11); God, whose dwelling is in heaven, also dwells on earth. The term is also applied to the “shekinah glory,” the visible pillar of fire and smoke that dwelled in the midst of Israel at Sinai (Ex 19:16-18), in the wilderness (40:34-38), and in the temple (1 Kgs 6:13; 8:10-13; 2 Chr 6:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The NT frequently alludes to the concept of the shekinah, even though the term itself is not used. God’s presence in the NT is frequently associated with light and glory (Lk 2:9; 9:29; Acts 9:3-6; 22:6-11; 26:12-16; 2 Pt 1:16-18). John’s Gospel emphasizes both the concept of glory and the concept of dwelling. When the Word became flesh, he dwelt among men who beheld his glory (Jn 1:14). The Spirit of God remained on him (v 32) and would be with his followers forever (14:16). He would abide in those who abide in Jesus (15:4-10). The same themes of dwelling in Christ and of his dwelling in his people occur repeatedly also in John’s letters (1 Jn 2:6, 14, 24, 27-28; 3:6, 14-15, 24; 2 Jn 1:9).<\/p>\n<p>Paul also identifies Christ as the shekinah of God. All the fullness of the Godhead dwells in him bodily (Col 1:19; 2:9). The dwelling of Christ in the church constitutes the saints as the people of God (1:15-23). Paul’s message was the “gospel of the glory of Christ,” for God had caused light to shine to give “knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ” (2 Cor 4:4-6, <span>niv<\/span>). Finally, the writer of Hebrews sees Christ as “the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being” (Heb 1:3, <span>niv<\/span>). <em>See<\/em> Glory; Pillar of Fire and Cloud; Theophany.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SHEKINAH*<\/h3>\n<p>Transliteration of a Hebrew word meaning “the one who dwells” or “that which dwells.” The term enters Christian theology from its use in the Targums and rabbinic literature to describe the immanent presence in the world of the transcendent Deity. Although the word is not itself used in either Testament, it clearly originates in OT passages that describe God as dwelling among a people or in a particular place (Gn 9:27; Ex 25:8; 29:45-46; Nm 5:3; 1 Kgs 6:13; Pss 68:16-18; 74:2; Is 8:18; Ez 43:7-9; Jl 3:17, 21; Zec 2:10-11); God, whose dwelling is in heaven, also dwells on earth. The term is also applied to the “shekinah glory,” the visible pillar of fire and smoke that dwelled in the midst of Israel at Sinai (Ex 19:16-18), in the wilderness (40:34-38), and in the temple (1 Kgs 6:13; 8:10-13; 2 Chr 6:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The NT frequently alludes to the concept of the shekinah, even though the term itself is not used. God’s presence in the NT is frequently associated with light and glory (Lk 2:9; 9:29; Acts 9:3-6; 22:6-11; 26:12-16; 2 Pt 1:16-18). John’s Gospel emphasizes both the concept of glory and the concept of dwelling. When the Word became flesh, he dwelt among men who beheld his glory (Jn 1:14). The Spirit of God remained on him (v 32) and would be with his followers forever (14:16). He would abide in those who abide in Jesus (15:4-10). The same themes of dwelling in Christ and of his dwelling in his people occur repeatedly also in John’s letters (1 Jn 2:6, 14, 24, 27-28; 3:6, 14-15, 24; 2 Jn 1:9).<\/p>\n<p>Paul also identifies Christ as the shekinah of God. All the fullness of the Godhead dwells in him bodily (Col 1:19; 2:9). The dwelling of Christ in the church constitutes the saints as the people of God (1:15-23). Paul’s message was the “gospel of the glory of Christ,” for God had caused light to shine to give “knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ” (2 Cor 4:4-6, <span>niv<\/span>). Finally, the writer of Hebrews sees Christ as “the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being” (Heb 1:3, <span>niv<\/span>). <em>See<\/em> Glory; Pillar of Fire and Cloud; Theophany.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SHEKINAH* Transliteration of a Hebrew word meaning “the one who dwells” or “that which dwells.” The term enters Christian theology from its use in the Targums and rabbinic literature to describe the immanent presence in the world of the transcendent Deity. Although the word is not itself used in either Testament, it clearly originates in OT passages that describe God as dwelling among a people or in a particular place (Gn 9:27; Ex 25:8; 29:45-46; Nm 5:3; 1 Kgs 6:13; Pss 68:16-18; 74:2; Is 8:1...","summary_en":"SHEKINAH* Transliteration of a Hebrew word meaning “the one who dwells” or “that which dwells.” The term enters Christian theology from its use in the Targums and rabbinic literature to describe the immanent presence in the world of the transcendent Deity. Although the word is not itself used in either Testament, it clearly originates in OT passages that describe God as dwelling among a people or in a particular place (Gn 9:27; Ex 25:8; 29:45-46; Nm 5:3; 1 Kgs 6:13; Pss 68:16-18; 74:2; Is 8:1...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":37589,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Transfiguration*","title_en":"Transfiguration*","content_ro":"<h3>TRANSFIGURATION*<\/h3>\n<p>Event in Jesus’ earthly ministry described in four passages in the NT (Mt 17:1-8; Mk 9:2-8; Lk 9:28-36; 2 Pt 1:16-18), wherein Jesus was glorified in the presence of three disciples: James, Peter, and John.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheLocationoftheEvent\">The Location of the Event<\/p>\n<p>The exact site where the Transfiguration took place is not given in the NT. Matthew 17:1 and Mark 9:2 simply state that it took place on a “high mountain.” Various suggestions have been made as to which mountain, with the traditional site being Mt Tabor, a round hill located in the plain of Esdraelon approximately 10 miles (16.1 kilometers) southwest of the Sea of Galilee. There are, however, two major problems with this suggested location. For one, it is difficult to see how Mt Tabor can justifiably be called a “high mountain,” for it is less than 2,000 feet (609.6 meters) above sea level. Second, in the time of Jesus a Roman garrison was stationed on Mt Tabor, and thus it would be unlikely that Jesus would have walked with his disciples up this mountain. A second suggestion for the site is Mt Carmel, which is located on the coast, but this seems off the main route of Jesus’ travel after the events of Caesarea Philippi. A third suggestion is Mt Hermon, which is over 9,000 feet (2,743.2 meters) high and lies about 12 miles (19.3 kilometers) to the northeast of Caesarea Philippi. Mt Hermon is indeed a high mountain and has the additional advantage of being located near Caesarea Philippi.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEvent\">The Event<\/p>\n<p>Six days after the events of Caesarea Philippi, Jesus took Peter, James, and John to be alone with him on a high mountain. As on several other instances, these three disciples alone accompanied Jesus (cf. also Mk 5:35-43; 14:32-42). According to the Gospel accounts, three things took place at the Transfiguration:<\/p>\n<p>1. “He was transfigured.” The various accounts all witness to an unusual transformation of Jesus. Jesus is transfigured: “his face shone like the sun, and his garments became white as light” (Mt 17:2). This transformation is described in Matthew and Mark by the Greek verb <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">metamorpheo<\/span><em>,<\/em> the root for the word “metamorphosis.” This indicates that a tremendous change occurred.<\/p>\n<li>2. Moses and Elijah appeared and spoke to Jesus. These men, who undoubtedly represent the Law and the Prophets, are said to have spoken to Jesus of his “exodus,” or departure (Lk 9:31). The term used in Luke 9:31 to describe Jesus’ “exodus” (or death) is rather unusual and clearly portrays the death of Jesus not as a tragedy or defeat but as a victorious journey.<\/li>\n<li>3. After Peter’s remark that it was good for the three disciples to be present and witness this, and after his suggestion that they build three booths, a voice came from heaven saying, “This is my beloved Son; listen to him” (Mk 9:7). These words were clearly a rebuke for Peter having placed Jesus on the same level as Moses and Elijah. To make three booths (one for Moses, one for Elijah, and one for Jesus) loses sight of who Jesus is, and the voice from heaven pointed out Peter’s error. The rebuke also must be understood in light of what Peter had said a few days earlier at Caesarea Philippi. Had Peter forgotten that he had just said to Jesus, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God”?<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMeaningoftheEvent\">The Meaning of the Event<\/p>\n<p>In order to understand the significance of the Transfiguration, it is important to contrast the heavenly voice at Jesus’ transfiguration with the heavenly voice at Jesus’ baptism. At the baptism both Mark 1:11 and Luke 3:22 indicate that the voice was addressed to Jesus: “You are my beloved Son.” At the Transfiguration, however, the voice is not addressed to Jesus but to Peter, James, and John: “This is my beloved Son” (Mk 9:7). Clearly the events of the Transfiguration are primarily directed toward the disciples rather than Jesus. “He was transfigured before them” (v 2); “there appeared to them Elijah with Moses” (v 4); “a cloud overshadowed them . . . ‘listen to him’ ” (v 7); “they no longer saw any one with them but Jesus only” (v 8). Evidently from these references, the incident is not meant so much for Jesus’ sake as for the disciples’. Following closely after the events of Caesarea Philippi, God appeared to affirm at the Transfiguration what Peter had previously confessed at Caesarea Philippi: Jesus is indeed the Christ, the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p>In 2 Peter 1:16-18 the writer recounts that he was an eyewitness of the Transfiguration. John seems to have done the same thing when he wrote the prologue to his Gospel and said, “We have beheld his glory” (Jn 1:14). At the Transfiguration the true form (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">morphe<\/span>) of the Son of God temporarily broke through the veil of his humanity and the disciples saw his preexistent glory. In this transformation of Jesus, the three disciples witnessed something of Jesus’ preincarnate glory, as well as his future glory, which he received at his resurrection and which all will see when he returns to judge the world.<\/p>\n<p>When Christ returns in his glory, all the believers will be transfigured and thereby receive a glorious, resurrected body. Thus, Christ’s transfiguration is the preview of every believer’s transfiguration (see 1 Cor 15:42-45; Phil 3:20-21; Col 3:4).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>TRANSFIGURATION*<\/h3>\n<p>Event in Jesus’ earthly ministry described in four passages in the NT (Mt 17:1-8; Mk 9:2-8; Lk 9:28-36; 2 Pt 1:16-18), wherein Jesus was glorified in the presence of three disciples: James, Peter, and John.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheLocationoftheEvent\">The Location of the Event<\/p>\n<p>The exact site where the Transfiguration took place is not given in the NT. Matthew 17:1 and Mark 9:2 simply state that it took place on a “high mountain.” Various suggestions have been made as to which mountain, with the traditional site being Mt Tabor, a round hill located in the plain of Esdraelon approximately 10 miles (16.1 kilometers) southwest of the Sea of Galilee. There are, however, two major problems with this suggested location. For one, it is difficult to see how Mt Tabor can justifiably be called a “high mountain,” for it is less than 2,000 feet (609.6 meters) above sea level. Second, in the time of Jesus a Roman garrison was stationed on Mt Tabor, and thus it would be unlikely that Jesus would have walked with his disciples up this mountain. A second suggestion for the site is Mt Carmel, which is located on the coast, but this seems off the main route of Jesus’ travel after the events of Caesarea Philippi. A third suggestion is Mt Hermon, which is over 9,000 feet (2,743.2 meters) high and lies about 12 miles (19.3 kilometers) to the northeast of Caesarea Philippi. Mt Hermon is indeed a high mountain and has the additional advantage of being located near Caesarea Philippi.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEvent\">The Event<\/p>\n<p>Six days after the events of Caesarea Philippi, Jesus took Peter, James, and John to be alone with him on a high mountain. As on several other instances, these three disciples alone accompanied Jesus (cf. also Mk 5:35-43; 14:32-42). According to the Gospel accounts, three things took place at the Transfiguration:<\/p>\n<p>1. “He was transfigured.” The various accounts all witness to an unusual transformation of Jesus. Jesus is transfigured: “his face shone like the sun, and his garments became white as light” (Mt 17:2). This transformation is described in Matthew and Mark by the Greek verb <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">metamorpheo<\/span><em>,<\/em> the root for the word “metamorphosis.” This indicates that a tremendous change occurred.<\/p>\n<li>2. Moses and Elijah appeared and spoke to Jesus. These men, who undoubtedly represent the Law and the Prophets, are said to have spoken to Jesus of his “exodus,” or departure (Lk 9:31). The term used in Luke 9:31 to describe Jesus’ “exodus” (or death) is rather unusual and clearly portrays the death of Jesus not as a tragedy or defeat but as a victorious journey.<\/li>\n<li>3. After Peter’s remark that it was good for the three disciples to be present and witness this, and after his suggestion that they build three booths, a voice came from heaven saying, “This is my beloved Son; listen to him” (Mk 9:7). These words were clearly a rebuke for Peter having placed Jesus on the same level as Moses and Elijah. To make three booths (one for Moses, one for Elijah, and one for Jesus) loses sight of who Jesus is, and the voice from heaven pointed out Peter’s error. The rebuke also must be understood in light of what Peter had said a few days earlier at Caesarea Philippi. Had Peter forgotten that he had just said to Jesus, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God”?<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMeaningoftheEvent\">The Meaning of the Event<\/p>\n<p>In order to understand the significance of the Transfiguration, it is important to contrast the heavenly voice at Jesus’ transfiguration with the heavenly voice at Jesus’ baptism. At the baptism both Mark 1:11 and Luke 3:22 indicate that the voice was addressed to Jesus: “You are my beloved Son.” At the Transfiguration, however, the voice is not addressed to Jesus but to Peter, James, and John: “This is my beloved Son” (Mk 9:7). Clearly the events of the Transfiguration are primarily directed toward the disciples rather than Jesus. “He was transfigured before them” (v 2); “there appeared to them Elijah with Moses” (v 4); “a cloud overshadowed them . . . ‘listen to him’ ” (v 7); “they no longer saw any one with them but Jesus only” (v 8). Evidently from these references, the incident is not meant so much for Jesus’ sake as for the disciples’. Following closely after the events of Caesarea Philippi, God appeared to affirm at the Transfiguration what Peter had previously confessed at Caesarea Philippi: Jesus is indeed the Christ, the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p>In 2 Peter 1:16-18 the writer recounts that he was an eyewitness of the Transfiguration. John seems to have done the same thing when he wrote the prologue to his Gospel and said, “We have beheld his glory” (Jn 1:14). At the Transfiguration the true form (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">morphe<\/span>) of the Son of God temporarily broke through the veil of his humanity and the disciples saw his preexistent glory. In this transformation of Jesus, the three disciples witnessed something of Jesus’ preincarnate glory, as well as his future glory, which he received at his resurrection and which all will see when he returns to judge the world.<\/p>\n<p>When Christ returns in his glory, all the believers will be transfigured and thereby receive a glorious, resurrected body. Thus, Christ’s transfiguration is the preview of every believer’s transfiguration (see 1 Cor 15:42-45; Phil 3:20-21; Col 3:4).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"TRANSFIGURATION* Event in Jesus’ earthly ministry described in four passages in the NT (Mt 17:1-8; Mk 9:2-8; Lk 9:28-36; 2 Pt 1:16-18), wherein Jesus was glorified in the presence of three disciples: James, Peter, and John. The Location of the Event The exact site where the Transfiguration took place is not given in the NT. Matthew 17:1 and Mark 9:2 simply state that it took place on a “high mountain.” Various suggestions have been made as to which mountain, with the traditional site being Mt...","summary_en":"TRANSFIGURATION* Event in Jesus’ earthly ministry described in four passages in the NT (Mt 17:1-8; Mk 9:2-8; Lk 9:28-36; 2 Pt 1:16-18), wherein Jesus was glorified in the presence of three disciples: James, Peter, and John. The Location of the Event The exact site where the Transfiguration took place is not given in the NT. Matthew 17:1 and Mark 9:2 simply state that it took place on a “high mountain.” Various suggestions have been made as to which mountain, with the traditional site being Mt...","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":38623,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Word, Word of God, Words of God","title_en":"Word, Word of God, Words of God","content_ro":"<h3>WORD, WORD OF GOD, WORDS OF GOD<\/h3>\n<p>A “word” is an expression that communicates. On the level of human communication, “words “usually refer to verbal expression. When God “spoke” over the centuries, though, he communicated in various ways (Heb 1:1), culminating in that epitome of all divine expression, Jesus Christ, his Son.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheImportanceofWords\">The Importance of Words<\/p>\n<p>In a mainly nonliterary society the dependability of the spoken word was all-important in law, trade, religion, marriage, and reputation. Receipts, agreements, and records had little usefulness. Personal integrity and sincere speech were essential to communication and, for most people, to self-expression and stable relationships. The words of poets, prophets, storytellers, and instructors were carefully preserved.<\/p>\n<p>Words were diligently tested. Foolish words, flattery, deceit, words of enticement, lies, rumor, scandal, and blasphemous speech were all recognized as evil. The oath had to be inviolable in commercial, judicial, and civic affairs. The spoken blessing had power within itself and could not be withdrawn (Gn 27:30-38; Mt 10:12-13); so also the vow (Jgs 11:34-35) and the curse (Gn 27:12-13). Equally powerful was the word of command—of priestly, judicial, or royal authority (Eccl 8:4).<\/p>\n<p>This estimate of human words lingers in the NT. The word reveals the inner self, and so every careless, hurtful, deceitful word will be judged (Mt 12:34-37; 5:22), as will blasphemy (Lk 12:10). Paul (Eph 4:29; 5:4) and James (Jas 3:1-12) preserve this Hebrew reverence for the spoken word.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheWordsofGod\">The Words of God<\/p>\n<p>God’s spoken word has been preserved in Scripture. His word came to and through the prophets (1 Kgs 12:22; 1 Chr 17:3; cf. Lk 3:2), who spoke and acted “by the word of the Lord.” His word also came in the law, which God “spoke” on Sinai (Ex 20:1); hence, “statutes,” “commandments,” and “precepts” are synonyms for God’s “word” (e.g., Ps 119).<\/p>\n<p>Periods when no such divine communication came constituted “famine” (1 Sm 3:1; Am 8:11). Mingled with warnings and injunctions were divine promises. All God’s words were dependable (Is 31:2), firmly fixed in heaven (Ps 119:89; Is 40:8), and backed up by divine oath (Jer 1:12; Ps 110:4; Ez 12:25, 28). A word, expressing the divine mind, was not threatening or burdensome; it was a delight, hope, joy, and protection against sin (Pss 1; 119; Jer 15:16). Men can live by it (Dt 8:3; Mt 4:4).<\/p>\n<p>God’s word has power to execute his will. It will not return to him “empty” but accomplish that which he purposes (Is 55:11). By his speech alone, God created the world, and his word upholds it (Gn 1; Ps 33:6; cf. Heb 1:2; 11:3; 2 Pt 3:5). Eventually, this divine revelation was put into writing, which makes the Bible also “the word of God” (Mk 7:13; cf. Lk 16:29-31; Jn 5:39).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus spoke the word of God. He was “mighty in word” (Lk 24:19); he taught with authority (Mk 1:22, 27), exercising power over the sea, disease, demons, and death (Mt 8:8, 13). His “word of the kingdom” is the living seed, which, planted in the good soil of receptive hearts, bears fruit for God (Mt 13:19; Mk 4:14). The word that Christ gives to his disciples cleanses them and frees them (Jn 8:31; 12:48; 15:3; 17:14). The word of faith the church preaches (Rom 10:8-9, 17) is variously described as the word of salvation, the word of grace, the word of reconciliation, the word of the gospel, the word of righteousness, and the word of life.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheWordofGod\">The Word of God<\/p>\n<p>Deliberately recalling Genesis 1, the Gospel writer, John, named the Son of God “the Word.” As the Word, the Son of God fully conveys and communicates God. The Greek term is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span><em>;<\/em> it was used in two ways by the Greeks. The word might be thought of as remaining within a person, when it denoted his thought or reason. Or it might refer to the word going forth from a person, when it denoted the expression of his thought, i.e., speech. As a philosophical term, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> denoted the principle of the universe, even the creative energy that generated the universe. In both the Jewish conception and the Greek, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> was associated with the idea of beginnings—the world began through the origination and instrumentality of the Word (Gn 1:3ff., where the expression “God said” is used again and again). John may have had these ideas in mind, but most likely he originated a new term to identify the Son of God as the divine expression in human form (Jn 1:14). He is the image of the invisible God (Col 1:15), the express image of God’s substance (Heb 1:3). In the Godhead, the Son functions as the revealer of God and the reality of God, which is a central theme throughout John’s Gospel. John used a similar title in his first epistle: “the Word of life” (1 Jn 1:1-3). And in Revelation 19:11-16, Jesus is presented as the King of kings and Lord of lords, who has a name on him: “the Word of God.”<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bible; John, Gospel of; Logos; Revelation.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>WORD, WORD OF GOD, WORDS OF GOD<\/h3>\n<p>A “word” is an expression that communicates. On the level of human communication, “words “usually refer to verbal expression. When God “spoke” over the centuries, though, he communicated in various ways (Heb 1:1), culminating in that epitome of all divine expression, Jesus Christ, his Son.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheImportanceofWords\">The Importance of Words<\/p>\n<p>In a mainly nonliterary society the dependability of the spoken word was all-important in law, trade, religion, marriage, and reputation. Receipts, agreements, and records had little usefulness. Personal integrity and sincere speech were essential to communication and, for most people, to self-expression and stable relationships. The words of poets, prophets, storytellers, and instructors were carefully preserved.<\/p>\n<p>Words were diligently tested. Foolish words, flattery, deceit, words of enticement, lies, rumor, scandal, and blasphemous speech were all recognized as evil. The oath had to be inviolable in commercial, judicial, and civic affairs. The spoken blessing had power within itself and could not be withdrawn (Gn 27:30-38; Mt 10:12-13); so also the vow (Jgs 11:34-35) and the curse (Gn 27:12-13). Equally powerful was the word of command—of priestly, judicial, or royal authority (Eccl 8:4).<\/p>\n<p>This estimate of human words lingers in the NT. The word reveals the inner self, and so every careless, hurtful, deceitful word will be judged (Mt 12:34-37; 5:22), as will blasphemy (Lk 12:10). Paul (Eph 4:29; 5:4) and James (Jas 3:1-12) preserve this Hebrew reverence for the spoken word.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheWordsofGod\">The Words of God<\/p>\n<p>God’s spoken word has been preserved in Scripture. His word came to and through the prophets (1 Kgs 12:22; 1 Chr 17:3; cf. Lk 3:2), who spoke and acted “by the word of the Lord.” His word also came in the law, which God “spoke” on Sinai (Ex 20:1); hence, “statutes,” “commandments,” and “precepts” are synonyms for God’s “word” (e.g., Ps 119).<\/p>\n<p>Periods when no such divine communication came constituted “famine” (1 Sm 3:1; Am 8:11). Mingled with warnings and injunctions were divine promises. All God’s words were dependable (Is 31:2), firmly fixed in heaven (Ps 119:89; Is 40:8), and backed up by divine oath (Jer 1:12; Ps 110:4; Ez 12:25, 28). A word, expressing the divine mind, was not threatening or burdensome; it was a delight, hope, joy, and protection against sin (Pss 1; 119; Jer 15:16). Men can live by it (Dt 8:3; Mt 4:4).<\/p>\n<p>God’s word has power to execute his will. It will not return to him “empty” but accomplish that which he purposes (Is 55:11). By his speech alone, God created the world, and his word upholds it (Gn 1; Ps 33:6; cf. Heb 1:2; 11:3; 2 Pt 3:5). Eventually, this divine revelation was put into writing, which makes the Bible also “the word of God” (Mk 7:13; cf. Lk 16:29-31; Jn 5:39).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus spoke the word of God. He was “mighty in word” (Lk 24:19); he taught with authority (Mk 1:22, 27), exercising power over the sea, disease, demons, and death (Mt 8:8, 13). His “word of the kingdom” is the living seed, which, planted in the good soil of receptive hearts, bears fruit for God (Mt 13:19; Mk 4:14). The word that Christ gives to his disciples cleanses them and frees them (Jn 8:31; 12:48; 15:3; 17:14). The word of faith the church preaches (Rom 10:8-9, 17) is variously described as the word of salvation, the word of grace, the word of reconciliation, the word of the gospel, the word of righteousness, and the word of life.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheWordofGod\">The Word of God<\/p>\n<p>Deliberately recalling Genesis 1, the Gospel writer, John, named the Son of God “the Word.” As the Word, the Son of God fully conveys and communicates God. The Greek term is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span><em>;<\/em> it was used in two ways by the Greeks. The word might be thought of as remaining within a person, when it denoted his thought or reason. Or it might refer to the word going forth from a person, when it denoted the expression of his thought, i.e., speech. As a philosophical term, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> denoted the principle of the universe, even the creative energy that generated the universe. In both the Jewish conception and the Greek, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> was associated with the idea of beginnings—the world began through the origination and instrumentality of the Word (Gn 1:3ff., where the expression “God said” is used again and again). John may have had these ideas in mind, but most likely he originated a new term to identify the Son of God as the divine expression in human form (Jn 1:14). He is the image of the invisible God (Col 1:15), the express image of God’s substance (Heb 1:3). In the Godhead, the Son functions as the revealer of God and the reality of God, which is a central theme throughout John’s Gospel. John used a similar title in his first epistle: “the Word of life” (1 Jn 1:1-3). And in Revelation 19:11-16, Jesus is presented as the King of kings and Lord of lords, who has a name on him: “the Word of God.”<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bible; John, Gospel of; Logos; Revelation.<\/p>","summary_ro":"WORD, WORD OF GOD, WORDS OF GOD A “word” is an expression that communicates. On the level of human communication, “words “usually refer to verbal expression. When God “spoke” over the centuries, though, he communicated in various ways (Heb 1:1), culminating in that epitome of all divine expression, Jesus Christ, his Son. The Importance of Words In a mainly nonliterary society the dependability of the spoken word was all-important in law, trade, religion, marriage, and reputation. Receipts, ag...","summary_en":"WORD, WORD OF GOD, WORDS OF GOD A “word” is an expression that communicates. On the level of human communication, “words “usually refer to verbal expression. When God “spoke” over the centuries, though, he communicated in various ways (Heb 1:1), culminating in that epitome of all divine expression, Jesus Christ, his Son. The Importance of Words In a mainly nonliterary society the dependability of the spoken word was all-important in law, trade, religion, marriage, and reputation. Receipts, ag...","source":"Articles\/W.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56316,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:14","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:14","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 5\"><strong>1:14<\/strong> The idea that <em>the Word became human<\/em> (literally <em>became flesh<\/em>) stunned both Greeks and Jews. Greeks separated the sphere of God from the mundane world of humanity, which they called <em>flesh<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sarx<\/span>). John wrote that God himself became <em>flesh<\/em> in Christ (cp. 1:1). Jesus’ humanity and divinity were complete, not partial. The two ideas—Jesus as 100-percent divine and 100-percent human—form the bedrock of a Christian understanding of Christ. • <em>the Word . . . made his home<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">skēnoō<\/span><em>,<\/em> “pitched his tent”) <em>among us:<\/em> This Greek word is related to the word used for the Old Testament Tabernacle (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">skēnē<\/span><em>,<\/em> “tent, tabernacle”), the tent in the wilderness where the Lord’s glory resided and where Israel came to worship (Exod 25:8-9). The Father’s glory in the Tabernacle (Exod 40:34-38) was now present in Jesus Christ (John 2:11; 12:23-28, 41; 17:1-5). • Jesus offered God’s <em>unfailing love and faithfulness<\/em>. Despite the world’s hostile darkness, Jesus entered the world to save it (3:15-17).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 5\"><strong>1:14<\/strong> The idea that <em>the Word became human<\/em> (literally <em>became flesh<\/em>) stunned both Greeks and Jews. Greeks separated the sphere of God from the mundane world of humanity, which they called <em>flesh<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sarx<\/span>). John wrote that God himself became <em>flesh<\/em> in Christ (cp. 1:1). Jesus’ humanity and divinity were complete, not partial. The two ideas—Jesus as 100-percent divine and 100-percent human—form the bedrock of a Christian understanding of Christ. • <em>the Word . . . made his home<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">skēnoō<\/span><em>,<\/em> “pitched his tent”) <em>among us:<\/em> This Greek word is related to the word used for the Old Testament Tabernacle (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">skēnē<\/span><em>,<\/em> “tent, tabernacle”), the tent in the wilderness where the Lord’s glory resided and where Israel came to worship (Exod 25:8-9). The Father’s glory in the Tabernacle (Exod 40:34-38) was now present in Jesus Christ (John 2:11; 12:23-28, 41; 17:1-5). • Jesus offered God’s <em>unfailing love and faithfulness<\/em>. Despite the world’s hostile darkness, Jesus entered the world to save it (3:15-17).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:14 The idea that the Word became human (literally became flesh) stunned both Greeks and Jews. Greeks separated the sphere of God from the mundane world of humanity, which they called flesh (Greek sarx). John wrote that God himself became flesh in Christ (cp. 1:1). Jesus’ humanity and divinity were complete, not partial. The two ideas—Jesus as 100-percent divine and 100-percent human—form the bedrock of a Christian understanding of Christ. • the Word . . . made his home (Greek skēnoō, “pitch...","summary_en":"1:14 The idea that the Word became human (literally became flesh) stunned both Greeks and Jews. Greeks separated the sphere of God from the mundane world of humanity, which they called flesh (Greek sarx). John wrote that God himself became flesh in Christ (cp. 1:1). Jesus’ humanity and divinity were complete, not partial. The two ideas—Jesus as 100-percent divine and 100-percent human—form the bedrock of a Christian understanding of Christ. • the Word . . . made his home (Greek skēnoō, “pitch...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83942,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:14","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:14","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 5\"><strong>1:14<\/strong> The idea that <em>the Word became human<\/em> (literally <em>became flesh<\/em>) stunned both Greeks and Jews. Greeks separated the sphere of God from the mundane world of humanity, which they called <em>flesh<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sarx<\/span>). John wrote that God himself became <em>flesh<\/em> in Christ (cp. 1:1). Jesus’ humanity and divinity were complete, not partial. The two ideas—Jesus as 100-percent divine and 100-percent human—form the bedrock of a Christian understanding of Christ. • <em>the Word . . . made his home<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">skēnoō<\/span><em>,<\/em> “pitched his tent”) <em>among us:<\/em> This Greek word is related to the word used for the Old Testament Tabernacle (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">skēnē<\/span><em>,<\/em> “tent, tabernacle”), the tent in the wilderness where the Lord’s glory resided and where Israel came to worship (Exod 25:8-9). The Father’s glory in the Tabernacle (Exod 40:34-38) was now present in Jesus Christ (John 2:11; 12:23-28, 41; 17:1-5). • Jesus offered God’s <em>unfailing love and faithfulness<\/em>. Despite the world’s hostile darkness, Jesus entered the world to save it (3:15-17).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 5\"><strong>1:14<\/strong> The idea that <em>the Word became human<\/em> (literally <em>became flesh<\/em>) stunned both Greeks and Jews. Greeks separated the sphere of God from the mundane world of humanity, which they called <em>flesh<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sarx<\/span>). John wrote that God himself became <em>flesh<\/em> in Christ (cp. 1:1). Jesus’ humanity and divinity were complete, not partial. The two ideas—Jesus as 100-percent divine and 100-percent human—form the bedrock of a Christian understanding of Christ. • <em>the Word . . . made his home<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">skēnoō<\/span><em>,<\/em> “pitched his tent”) <em>among us:<\/em> This Greek word is related to the word used for the Old Testament Tabernacle (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">skēnē<\/span><em>,<\/em> “tent, tabernacle”), the tent in the wilderness where the Lord’s glory resided and where Israel came to worship (Exod 25:8-9). The Father’s glory in the Tabernacle (Exod 40:34-38) was now present in Jesus Christ (John 2:11; 12:23-28, 41; 17:1-5). • Jesus offered God’s <em>unfailing love and faithfulness<\/em>. Despite the world’s hostile darkness, Jesus entered the world to save it (3:15-17).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:14 The idea that the Word became human (literally became flesh) stunned both Greeks and Jews. Greeks separated the sphere of God from the mundane world of humanity, which they called flesh (Greek sarx). John wrote that God himself became flesh in Christ (cp. 1:1). Jesus’ humanity and divinity were complete, not partial. The two ideas—Jesus as 100-percent divine and 100-percent human—form the bedrock of a Christian understanding of Christ. • the Word . . . made his home (Greek skēnoō, “pitch...","summary_en":"1:14 The idea that the Word became human (literally became flesh) stunned both Greeks and Jews. Greeks separated the sphere of God from the mundane world of humanity, which they called flesh (Greek sarx). John wrote that God himself became flesh in Christ (cp. 1:1). Jesus’ humanity and divinity were complete, not partial. The two ideas—Jesus as 100-percent divine and 100-percent human—form the bedrock of a Christian understanding of Christ. • the Word . . . made his home (Greek skēnoō, “pitch...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111568,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:14","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:14","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 5\"><strong>1:14<\/strong> The idea that <em>the Word became human<\/em> (literally <em>became flesh<\/em>) stunned both Greeks and Jews. Greeks separated the sphere of God from the mundane world of humanity, which they called <em>flesh<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sarx<\/span>). John wrote that God himself became <em>flesh<\/em> in Christ (cp. 1:1). Jesus’ humanity and divinity were complete, not partial. The two ideas—Jesus as 100-percent divine and 100-percent human—form the bedrock of a Christian understanding of Christ. • <em>the Word . . . made his home<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">skēnoō<\/span><em>,<\/em> “pitched his tent”) <em>among us:<\/em> This Greek word is related to the word used for the Old Testament Tabernacle (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">skēnē<\/span><em>,<\/em> “tent, tabernacle”), the tent in the wilderness where the Lord’s glory resided and where Israel came to worship (Exod 25:8-9). The Father’s glory in the Tabernacle (Exod 40:34-38) was now present in Jesus Christ (John 2:11; 12:23-28, 41; 17:1-5). • Jesus offered God’s <em>unfailing love and faithfulness<\/em>. Despite the world’s hostile darkness, Jesus entered the world to save it (3:15-17).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 5\"><strong>1:14<\/strong> The idea that <em>the Word became human<\/em> (literally <em>became flesh<\/em>) stunned both Greeks and Jews. Greeks separated the sphere of God from the mundane world of humanity, which they called <em>flesh<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sarx<\/span>). John wrote that God himself became <em>flesh<\/em> in Christ (cp. 1:1). Jesus’ humanity and divinity were complete, not partial. The two ideas—Jesus as 100-percent divine and 100-percent human—form the bedrock of a Christian understanding of Christ. • <em>the Word . . . made his home<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">skēnoō<\/span><em>,<\/em> “pitched his tent”) <em>among us:<\/em> This Greek word is related to the word used for the Old Testament Tabernacle (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">skēnē<\/span><em>,<\/em> “tent, tabernacle”), the tent in the wilderness where the Lord’s glory resided and where Israel came to worship (Exod 25:8-9). The Father’s glory in the Tabernacle (Exod 40:34-38) was now present in Jesus Christ (John 2:11; 12:23-28, 41; 17:1-5). • Jesus offered God’s <em>unfailing love and faithfulness<\/em>. Despite the world’s hostile darkness, Jesus entered the world to save it (3:15-17).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:14 The idea that the Word became human (literally became flesh) stunned both Greeks and Jews. Greeks separated the sphere of God from the mundane world of humanity, which they called flesh (Greek sarx). John wrote that God himself became flesh in Christ (cp. 1:1). Jesus’ humanity and divinity were complete, not partial. The two ideas—Jesus as 100-percent divine and 100-percent human—form the bedrock of a Christian understanding of Christ. • the Word . . . made his home (Greek skēnoō, “pitch...","summary_en":"1:14 The idea that the Word became human (literally became flesh) stunned both Greeks and Jews. Greeks separated the sphere of God from the mundane world of humanity, which they called flesh (Greek sarx). John wrote that God himself became flesh in Christ (cp. 1:1). Jesus’ humanity and divinity were complete, not partial. The two ideas—Jesus as 100-percent divine and 100-percent human—form the bedrock of a Christian understanding of Christ. • the Word . . . made his home (Greek skēnoō, “pitch...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139194,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:14","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:14","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 5\"><strong>1:14<\/strong> The idea that <em>the Word became human<\/em> (literally <em>became flesh<\/em>) stunned both Greeks and Jews. Greeks separated the sphere of God from the mundane world of humanity, which they called <em>flesh<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sarx<\/span>). John wrote that God himself became <em>flesh<\/em> in Christ (cp. 1:1). Jesus’ humanity and divinity were complete, not partial. The two ideas—Jesus as 100-percent divine and 100-percent human—form the bedrock of a Christian understanding of Christ. • <em>the Word . . . made his home<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">skēnoō<\/span><em>,<\/em> “pitched his tent”) <em>among us:<\/em> This Greek word is related to the word used for the Old Testament Tabernacle (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">skēnē<\/span><em>,<\/em> “tent, tabernacle”), the tent in the wilderness where the Lord’s glory resided and where Israel came to worship (Exod 25:8-9). The Father’s glory in the Tabernacle (Exod 40:34-38) was now present in Jesus Christ (John 2:11; 12:23-28, 41; 17:1-5). • Jesus offered God’s <em>unfailing love and faithfulness<\/em>. Despite the world’s hostile darkness, Jesus entered the world to save it (3:15-17).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text 5\"><strong>1:14<\/strong> The idea that <em>the Word became human<\/em> (literally <em>became flesh<\/em>) stunned both Greeks and Jews. Greeks separated the sphere of God from the mundane world of humanity, which they called <em>flesh<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sarx<\/span>). John wrote that God himself became <em>flesh<\/em> in Christ (cp. 1:1). Jesus’ humanity and divinity were complete, not partial. The two ideas—Jesus as 100-percent divine and 100-percent human—form the bedrock of a Christian understanding of Christ. • <em>the Word . . . made his home<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">skēnoō<\/span><em>,<\/em> “pitched his tent”) <em>among us:<\/em> This Greek word is related to the word used for the Old Testament Tabernacle (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">skēnē<\/span><em>,<\/em> “tent, tabernacle”), the tent in the wilderness where the Lord’s glory resided and where Israel came to worship (Exod 25:8-9). The Father’s glory in the Tabernacle (Exod 40:34-38) was now present in Jesus Christ (John 2:11; 12:23-28, 41; 17:1-5). • Jesus offered God’s <em>unfailing love and faithfulness<\/em>. Despite the world’s hostile darkness, Jesus entered the world to save it (3:15-17).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:14 The idea that the Word became human (literally became flesh) stunned both Greeks and Jews. Greeks separated the sphere of God from the mundane world of humanity, which they called flesh (Greek sarx). John wrote that God himself became flesh in Christ (cp. 1:1). Jesus’ humanity and divinity were complete, not partial. The two ideas—Jesus as 100-percent divine and 100-percent human—form the bedrock of a Christian understanding of Christ. • the Word . . . made his home (Greek skēnoō, “pitch...","summary_en":"1:14 The idea that the Word became human (literally became flesh) stunned both Greeks and Jews. Greeks separated the sphere of God from the mundane world of humanity, which they called flesh (Greek sarx). John wrote that God himself became flesh in Christ (cp. 1:1). Jesus’ humanity and divinity were complete, not partial. The two ideas—Jesus as 100-percent divine and 100-percent human—form the bedrock of a Christian understanding of Christ. • the Word . . . made his home (Greek skēnoō, “pitch...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60726,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Cloud and Fire","title_en":"The Cloud and Fire","content_ro":"<h3>The Cloud and Fire<\/h3>\n<p>When Israel was in the wilderness, God led the nation with a pillar of cloud and fire. The pillar joined the Israelites right after the first Passover, immediately after Israel left Egypt (Exod 13:20-22).<\/p>\n<p>The pillar served a variety of functions. When the Egyptians pursued the Israelites, the cloud moved behind the people of Israel and prevented an Egyptian advance (Exod 14:19-20). Through the rest of Israel’s travels, it was a visible indication that “the <span>Lord<\/span> went ahead of them” (Exod 13:21). When the pillar settled over the Tabernacle and the camp of Israel, it represented the Lord’s presence and protection. The cloud and fire also provided divine guidance by indicating when the Israelites should move (Exod 40:36-38; Num 9:17-23). When the pillar was stationary, Israel stayed where they were. When it lifted and moved on, the Israelites broke camp and followed. They camped in different places for varying amounts of time, sometimes briefly and sometimes for a longer period. Israel thus “camped or traveled at the <span>Lord<\/span>’s command” (Num 9:23). The pillar of cloud and fire was like a divine banner flying over the tribes on the march (cp. 10:14, 18, 22, 25).<\/p>\n<p>The pillar regularly appeared as a cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night (9:15-16; Exod 13:21). In the Bible, both fire and clouds often indicate the presence and glory of God (e.g., Exod 19:16-18; 24:15-18; Matt 17:5; 24:30; Acts 1:9; cp. Ps 18:8-13). The cloud and fire imagery indicated that God’s presence and glory moved with Israel through the wilderness. This special manifestation of God (a <em>theophany<\/em>) stayed with them “throughout all their journeys” while they were in the wilderness (Exod 40:38; see also Exod 13:22). Sometimes, “the cloud covered the Tabernacle, and the glory of the <span>Lord<\/span> filled the Tabernacle,” so that “Moses could no longer enter the Tabernacle” (Exod 40:34-35). On other occasions, the cloud descended and hovered near the entrance to the Tent of Meeting, indicating that the Lord was speaking with Moses “face to face” (Exod 33:7-11; cp. Num 11:25; 12:5; Deut 31:15). The pillar of cloud and fire was a constant, reassuring reminder of the Lord’s presence. We are not given any specific description of the fire and the cloud other than that it was shaped like a pillar; regardless, it was a powerful symbol of God’s special care for Israel (see Neh 9:19-21; cp. Pss 46:1; 139; John 1:14; Rom 8:31-39).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 13:20-22; 14:19-24; 16:10; 19:16-18; 24:15-18; 33:7-11; 40:34-38; Lev 16:2; Num 9:15-23; 10:11-12, 34; 11:25; 12:5, 10; 14:14; 16:42; Deut 31:15; 1 Kgs 8:11; 2 Chr 5:14; Neh 9:19-21; Pss 78:14; 99:7; 104:3; Ezek 1:4-5; 10:3; Matt 17:5; 24:30; 26:64; Luke 9:34-35; Acts 1:9; 1 Cor 10:2; 1 Thes 4:17; Rev 1:7; 14:14-16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Cloud and Fire<\/h3>\n<p>When Israel was in the wilderness, God led the nation with a pillar of cloud and fire. The pillar joined the Israelites right after the first Passover, immediately after Israel left Egypt (Exod 13:20-22).<\/p>\n<p>The pillar served a variety of functions. When the Egyptians pursued the Israelites, the cloud moved behind the people of Israel and prevented an Egyptian advance (Exod 14:19-20). Through the rest of Israel’s travels, it was a visible indication that “the <span>Lord<\/span> went ahead of them” (Exod 13:21). When the pillar settled over the Tabernacle and the camp of Israel, it represented the Lord’s presence and protection. The cloud and fire also provided divine guidance by indicating when the Israelites should move (Exod 40:36-38; Num 9:17-23). When the pillar was stationary, Israel stayed where they were. When it lifted and moved on, the Israelites broke camp and followed. They camped in different places for varying amounts of time, sometimes briefly and sometimes for a longer period. Israel thus “camped or traveled at the <span>Lord<\/span>’s command” (Num 9:23). The pillar of cloud and fire was like a divine banner flying over the tribes on the march (cp. 10:14, 18, 22, 25).<\/p>\n<p>The pillar regularly appeared as a cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night (9:15-16; Exod 13:21). In the Bible, both fire and clouds often indicate the presence and glory of God (e.g., Exod 19:16-18; 24:15-18; Matt 17:5; 24:30; Acts 1:9; cp. Ps 18:8-13). The cloud and fire imagery indicated that God’s presence and glory moved with Israel through the wilderness. This special manifestation of God (a <em>theophany<\/em>) stayed with them “throughout all their journeys” while they were in the wilderness (Exod 40:38; see also Exod 13:22). Sometimes, “the cloud covered the Tabernacle, and the glory of the <span>Lord<\/span> filled the Tabernacle,” so that “Moses could no longer enter the Tabernacle” (Exod 40:34-35). On other occasions, the cloud descended and hovered near the entrance to the Tent of Meeting, indicating that the Lord was speaking with Moses “face to face” (Exod 33:7-11; cp. Num 11:25; 12:5; Deut 31:15). The pillar of cloud and fire was a constant, reassuring reminder of the Lord’s presence. We are not given any specific description of the fire and the cloud other than that it was shaped like a pillar; regardless, it was a powerful symbol of God’s special care for Israel (see Neh 9:19-21; cp. Pss 46:1; 139; John 1:14; Rom 8:31-39).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 13:20-22; 14:19-24; 16:10; 19:16-18; 24:15-18; 33:7-11; 40:34-38; Lev 16:2; Num 9:15-23; 10:11-12, 34; 11:25; 12:5, 10; 14:14; 16:42; Deut 31:15; 1 Kgs 8:11; 2 Chr 5:14; Neh 9:19-21; Pss 78:14; 99:7; 104:3; Ezek 1:4-5; 10:3; Matt 17:5; 24:30; 26:64; Luke 9:34-35; Acts 1:9; 1 Cor 10:2; 1 Thes 4:17; Rev 1:7; 14:14-16<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Cloud and Fire When Israel was in the wilderness, God led the nation with a pillar of cloud and fire. The pillar joined the Israelites right after the first Passover, immediately after Israel left Egypt (Exod 13:20-22). The pillar served a variety of functions. When the Egyptians pursued the Israelites, the cloud moved behind the people of Israel and prevented an Egyptian advance (Exod 14:19-20). Through the rest of Israel’s travels, it was a visible indication that “the Lord went ahead o...","summary_en":"The Cloud and Fire When Israel was in the wilderness, God led the nation with a pillar of cloud and fire. The pillar joined the Israelites right after the first Passover, immediately after Israel left Egypt (Exod 13:20-22). The pillar served a variety of functions. When the Egyptians pursued the Israelites, the cloud moved behind the people of Israel and prevented an Egyptian advance (Exod 14:19-20). Through the rest of Israel’s travels, it was a visible indication that “the Lord went ahead o...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60783,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Central Sanctuary","title_en":"The Central Sanctuary","content_ro":"<h3>The Central Sanctuary<\/h3>\n<p>God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>God is <em>transcendent<\/em> (above all things) and <em>omnipresent<\/em> (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple belonged to him and bore his name, so they were, in a sense, his dwelling places. In the ancient Near East, names were more than labels. They represented the character and nature of the named individuals (e.g., Jacob, Gen 27:36; Jesus, Matt 1:21; Barnabas, Acts 4:36; Peter, Matt 16:17-19). Thus Solomon could advise, “Choose a good reputation [<em>name<\/em>] over great riches” (Prov 22:1).<\/p>\n<p>God made his home in a sanctuary that bore his name. His glorious presence manifested in fire and cloud during the wilderness wanderings served as a constant reminder that he was at home among his people (Exod 40:34-35); likewise, upon the completion of the Temple, his presence was evidenced (1 Kgs 8:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>God would later come to dwell among his people in the person of Jesus Christ (John 1:14), thereby eliminating the need for a central sanctuary (see John 4:19-24). And now, because of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, all believers are able to house God’s presence (1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:8-9, 22, 40; 26:30; 33:7-11; 40:34-35; Num 7:1; 11:16; Deut 12:4-7; 31:14-15; 1 Kgs 8:10-11, 27; John 1:14; 2:19-21; Acts 7:44; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; Heb 8:2, 5; Rev 21:22<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Central Sanctuary<\/h3>\n<p>God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>God is <em>transcendent<\/em> (above all things) and <em>omnipresent<\/em> (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple belonged to him and bore his name, so they were, in a sense, his dwelling places. In the ancient Near East, names were more than labels. They represented the character and nature of the named individuals (e.g., Jacob, Gen 27:36; Jesus, Matt 1:21; Barnabas, Acts 4:36; Peter, Matt 16:17-19). Thus Solomon could advise, “Choose a good reputation [<em>name<\/em>] over great riches” (Prov 22:1).<\/p>\n<p>God made his home in a sanctuary that bore his name. His glorious presence manifested in fire and cloud during the wilderness wanderings served as a constant reminder that he was at home among his people (Exod 40:34-35); likewise, upon the completion of the Temple, his presence was evidenced (1 Kgs 8:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>God would later come to dwell among his people in the person of Jesus Christ (John 1:14), thereby eliminating the need for a central sanctuary (see John 4:19-24). And now, because of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, all believers are able to house God’s presence (1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:8-9, 22, 40; 26:30; 33:7-11; 40:34-35; Num 7:1; 11:16; Deut 12:4-7; 31:14-15; 1 Kgs 8:10-11, 27; John 1:14; 2:19-21; Acts 7:44; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; Heb 8:2, 5; Rev 21:22<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Central Sanctuary God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem. God is transcendent (above all things) and omnipresent (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple ...","summary_en":"The Central Sanctuary God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem. God is transcendent (above all things) and omnipresent (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":61435,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Jerusalem","title_en":"Jerusalem","content_ro":"<h3>Jerusalem<\/h3>\n<p>Jerusalem was a functioning city as early as four hundred years before the time of David. It was never fully captured during the conquest and the period of the judges (Josh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21), and peaceful relations were evidently established between the autonomous Jebusite enclave and the surrounding Israelites (Judg 19:10-12). So impregnable was Jerusalem that the Old Testament records only three successful invaders: David, Jehoash (2 Kgs 14:11-14), and Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon (2 Kgs 25:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Whatever David’s method of capturing Jerusalem (his use of a water tunnel is debatable—see study note on 5:8), he secured Jerusalem as the political, and eventually spiritual, capital of Israel. Psalm 48 speaks beautifully and powerfully of Jerusalem as a fortress. Its towers, bulwarks, and easily defensible citadels with their rugged terrain could produce a false sense of security, if not idolatry. Psalm 48:1-3 reminds the reader that God’s living presence, not the topography of the city, made Jerusalem safe.<\/p>\n<p>Both the Old Testament and the New Testament call Jerusalem a “holy city” (see Neh 11:1, 18; Isa 52:1; Dan 9:24; Matt 4:5; 27:53; Rev 21:2). It is the only city so described in the Bible. Wherein lies this city’s holiness? It cannot be a reflection of the holiness of its occupants. In fact, so unholy was the populace that the city was decimated by the Babylonians in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. Nor was it a holy city because it was Israel’s capital for several centuries. Jerusalem was a holy city, first of all, because God chose it (1 Kgs 8:44, 48; 11:13, 32, 36; 2 Chr 6:5, 34). And because he chose it, he put his glory and his name there (see 1 Kgs 14:21; 2 Chr 12:13; Ezek 8–10; 43:1-27).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels and Acts, Jerusalem was still a city of great importance. Herod the Great (37–4 <span>BC<\/span>) had expanded the city and conducted extensive building projects—including the Temple. It remained the center of Israel’s spiritual life (see e.g., Acts 2:46; 3:1-26; 5:12), and many events in the lives of Jesus and his followers occurred in Jerusalem. Jesus had some harsh words for Jerusalem (see Matt 23:37-39)—especially its leadership—and he was eventually put to death there. Jesus warned of impending judgment on the city (see Mark 13:1-2; Luke 21:20-24), and his words were actualized in the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans in <span>AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\n<p>But the New Testament also introduces the new Jerusalem, the heavenly city comprised of God’s holy people (Heb 11:10; Rev 3:12; 21:2). As the earthly Jerusalem was the sphere in which the glorious presence and reign of God was partially actualized through King David and his successors, the new Jerusalem represents the government of Jesus Christ, the son of David, and his everlasting presence with his people (cp. John 1:14; Rev 21:3).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Josh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21; 2 Sam 5:6-9; 1 Kgs 8:1; 2 Kgs 18:13-17; 25:1-10; 2 Chr 3:1; 12:1-12; 26:9, 15; 32:1-5, 27-30; Ezra 1:1-6; Neh 1:1–6:19; Ps 48:1-3; 125:2; Isa 14:32; 52:1-3; Gal 4:25-26; Heb 12:22-24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jerusalem<\/h3>\n<p>Jerusalem was a functioning city as early as four hundred years before the time of David. It was never fully captured during the conquest and the period of the judges (Josh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21), and peaceful relations were evidently established between the autonomous Jebusite enclave and the surrounding Israelites (Judg 19:10-12). So impregnable was Jerusalem that the Old Testament records only three successful invaders: David, Jehoash (2 Kgs 14:11-14), and Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon (2 Kgs 25:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Whatever David’s method of capturing Jerusalem (his use of a water tunnel is debatable—see study note on 5:8), he secured Jerusalem as the political, and eventually spiritual, capital of Israel. Psalm 48 speaks beautifully and powerfully of Jerusalem as a fortress. Its towers, bulwarks, and easily defensible citadels with their rugged terrain could produce a false sense of security, if not idolatry. Psalm 48:1-3 reminds the reader that God’s living presence, not the topography of the city, made Jerusalem safe.<\/p>\n<p>Both the Old Testament and the New Testament call Jerusalem a “holy city” (see Neh 11:1, 18; Isa 52:1; Dan 9:24; Matt 4:5; 27:53; Rev 21:2). It is the only city so described in the Bible. Wherein lies this city’s holiness? It cannot be a reflection of the holiness of its occupants. In fact, so unholy was the populace that the city was decimated by the Babylonians in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. Nor was it a holy city because it was Israel’s capital for several centuries. Jerusalem was a holy city, first of all, because God chose it (1 Kgs 8:44, 48; 11:13, 32, 36; 2 Chr 6:5, 34). And because he chose it, he put his glory and his name there (see 1 Kgs 14:21; 2 Chr 12:13; Ezek 8–10; 43:1-27).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels and Acts, Jerusalem was still a city of great importance. Herod the Great (37–4 <span>BC<\/span>) had expanded the city and conducted extensive building projects—including the Temple. It remained the center of Israel’s spiritual life (see e.g., Acts 2:46; 3:1-26; 5:12), and many events in the lives of Jesus and his followers occurred in Jerusalem. Jesus had some harsh words for Jerusalem (see Matt 23:37-39)—especially its leadership—and he was eventually put to death there. Jesus warned of impending judgment on the city (see Mark 13:1-2; Luke 21:20-24), and his words were actualized in the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans in <span>AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\n<p>But the New Testament also introduces the new Jerusalem, the heavenly city comprised of God’s holy people (Heb 11:10; Rev 3:12; 21:2). As the earthly Jerusalem was the sphere in which the glorious presence and reign of God was partially actualized through King David and his successors, the new Jerusalem represents the government of Jesus Christ, the son of David, and his everlasting presence with his people (cp. John 1:14; Rev 21:3).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Josh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21; 2 Sam 5:6-9; 1 Kgs 8:1; 2 Kgs 18:13-17; 25:1-10; 2 Chr 3:1; 12:1-12; 26:9, 15; 32:1-5, 27-30; Ezra 1:1-6; Neh 1:1–6:19; Ps 48:1-3; 125:2; Isa 14:32; 52:1-3; Gal 4:25-26; Heb 12:22-24<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jerusalem Jerusalem was a functioning city as early as four hundred years before the time of David. It was never fully captured during the conquest and the period of the judges (Josh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21), and peaceful relations were evidently established between the autonomous Jebusite enclave and the surrounding Israelites (Judg 19:10-12). So impregnable was Jerusalem that the Old Testament records only three successful invaders: David, Jehoash (2 Kgs 14:11-14), and Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon...","summary_en":"Jerusalem Jerusalem was a functioning city as early as four hundred years before the time of David. It was never fully captured during the conquest and the period of the judges (Josh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21), and peaceful relations were evidently established between the autonomous Jebusite enclave and the surrounding Israelites (Judg 19:10-12). So impregnable was Jerusalem that the Old Testament records only three successful invaders: David, Jehoash (2 Kgs 14:11-14), and Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64347,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Glory with His People","title_en":"God’s Glory with His People","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Glory with His People<\/h3>\n<p>In ancient Israel, God’s glory was particularly manifest at the central sanctuaries that had been built for him. When the Israelites completed construction of the Tabernacle, that sacred space became filled with the glory of the Lord (Exod 40:34-35). Likewise, after the Temple was completed and the Ark of the Covenant was brought in, God’s glorious presence filled the Temple (1 Kgs 8:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>The presence and absence of God’s glory is a central theme in the book of Ezekiel. God’s glory appears to the prophet Ezekiel while he is exiled in Babylon, meaning that his glory was no longer present at the Temple in Jerusalem. The reason God’s glory had departed from the Temple at that time becomes clear in Ezekiel’s vision in Ezekiel 8–11, in which the prophet sees the abominations that had polluted the Temple in Jerusalem. Without God’s presence, the Temple had become an empty shell awaiting destruction. God was not forcibly evicted by the superior might of the Babylonian army; he voluntarily departed because his people were defiled. Their sin drove him away from the land he had promised to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. For a time, the Lord went from Jerusalem to Babylon to become a sanctuary for the exiles there (see 11:16).<\/p>\n<p>God would not abandon his Temple forever. After pouring out his wrath in full measure, he would restore a remnant to their land and sanctify them by his Spirit so that he could once again dwell in their midst in a new sanctuary (37:26). God’s glory, dwelling among his people forever (43:1-5), is at the heart of Ezekiel’s vision of their restoration.<\/p>\n<p>The glory of God has come to live among us fully in the person of Jesus Christ. As John testifies, “We have seen his glory, the glory of the Father’s one and only Son” (John 1:14). The aged Simeon saw the baby Jesus brought to the Temple and described him as “a light to reveal God to the nations, and . . . the glory of your people Israel” (Luke 2:32). Jesus’ glory was veiled while he was on earth, though for a moment on the Mount of Transfiguration his radiance was revealed to his closest disciples (Matt 17:2). He experienced his own abandonment by God as he hung on the cross, bearing the curse for our sin (Matt 27:46). Now, as the exalted and glorified Lord, he sits at God’s right hand (Eph 1:19-20). By his Spirit, he has promised never to abandon us, but to be with us to the end of time (Matt 28:20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 15:11; 33:18–34:8; 40:34; Ps 19:1-11; Isa 4:5-6; 6:3; 40:5; 42:8; 43:7; 58:8; 60:1-2; Ezek 1:1-28; 11:16; 37:26; 43:1-5; 44:4; Hab 2:14; Matt 17:2; 28:20; Luke 2:32; John 1:14; 2 Cor 4:4-6; Heb 1:3; Rev 21:10-11, 23<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Glory with His People<\/h3>\n<p>In ancient Israel, God’s glory was particularly manifest at the central sanctuaries that had been built for him. When the Israelites completed construction of the Tabernacle, that sacred space became filled with the glory of the Lord (Exod 40:34-35). Likewise, after the Temple was completed and the Ark of the Covenant was brought in, God’s glorious presence filled the Temple (1 Kgs 8:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>The presence and absence of God’s glory is a central theme in the book of Ezekiel. God’s glory appears to the prophet Ezekiel while he is exiled in Babylon, meaning that his glory was no longer present at the Temple in Jerusalem. The reason God’s glory had departed from the Temple at that time becomes clear in Ezekiel’s vision in Ezekiel 8–11, in which the prophet sees the abominations that had polluted the Temple in Jerusalem. Without God’s presence, the Temple had become an empty shell awaiting destruction. God was not forcibly evicted by the superior might of the Babylonian army; he voluntarily departed because his people were defiled. Their sin drove him away from the land he had promised to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. For a time, the Lord went from Jerusalem to Babylon to become a sanctuary for the exiles there (see 11:16).<\/p>\n<p>God would not abandon his Temple forever. After pouring out his wrath in full measure, he would restore a remnant to their land and sanctify them by his Spirit so that he could once again dwell in their midst in a new sanctuary (37:26). God’s glory, dwelling among his people forever (43:1-5), is at the heart of Ezekiel’s vision of their restoration.<\/p>\n<p>The glory of God has come to live among us fully in the person of Jesus Christ. As John testifies, “We have seen his glory, the glory of the Father’s one and only Son” (John 1:14). The aged Simeon saw the baby Jesus brought to the Temple and described him as “a light to reveal God to the nations, and . . . the glory of your people Israel” (Luke 2:32). Jesus’ glory was veiled while he was on earth, though for a moment on the Mount of Transfiguration his radiance was revealed to his closest disciples (Matt 17:2). He experienced his own abandonment by God as he hung on the cross, bearing the curse for our sin (Matt 27:46). Now, as the exalted and glorified Lord, he sits at God’s right hand (Eph 1:19-20). By his Spirit, he has promised never to abandon us, but to be with us to the end of time (Matt 28:20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 15:11; 33:18–34:8; 40:34; Ps 19:1-11; Isa 4:5-6; 6:3; 40:5; 42:8; 43:7; 58:8; 60:1-2; Ezek 1:1-28; 11:16; 37:26; 43:1-5; 44:4; Hab 2:14; Matt 17:2; 28:20; Luke 2:32; John 1:14; 2 Cor 4:4-6; Heb 1:3; Rev 21:10-11, 23<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Glory with His People In ancient Israel, God’s glory was particularly manifest at the central sanctuaries that had been built for him. When the Israelites completed construction of the Tabernacle, that sacred space became filled with the glory of the Lord (Exod 40:34-35). Likewise, after the Temple was completed and the Ark of the Covenant was brought in, God’s glorious presence filled the Temple (1 Kgs 8:10-11). The presence and absence of God’s glory is a central theme in the book of ...","summary_en":"God’s Glory with His People In ancient Israel, God’s glory was particularly manifest at the central sanctuaries that had been built for him. When the Israelites completed construction of the Tabernacle, that sacred space became filled with the glory of the Lord (Exod 40:34-35). Likewise, after the Temple was completed and the Ark of the Covenant was brought in, God’s glorious presence filled the Temple (1 Kgs 8:10-11). The presence and absence of God’s glory is a central theme in the book of ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64823,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Return of God’s Presence with His People","title_en":"The Return of God’s Presence with His People","content_ro":"<h3>The Return of God’s Presence with His People<\/h3>\n<p>The descriptions of the Exile include the tragedy that, as part of his judgment, God withdrew his presence from his people and from the holy city of Jerusalem. This notion is perhaps most clearly demonstrated in a vision of the prophet Ezekiel, who saw a visual depiction of God’s glorious presence leaving the Temple (Ezek 10:1-22; 11:22-23). As such, when the prophets discussed the future restoration of God’s people and their return to the land, they also often spoke of the return of God’s presence (see, e.g., Isa 52:7-8; Ezek 43:1-9).<\/p>\n<p>The prophet Zechariah placed a strong emphasis on this theme of the Lord returning to his people. He was certain that God would once again live among them and that the glory of the Lord would rest in Jerusalem (1:16; 2:5, 10-11; 8:3, 23). God’s presence would return with the rebuilding of the Temple, and Israel would experience spiritual restoration and renewed agricultural bounty (1:17; 4:8-9; 6:15; see also Hag 2:19). In the future, God’s presence would rescue Jerusalem and the people of Israel from enemy nations. The Lord would be enthroned as King over all the earth, and the whole earth would worship the one true God (Zech 9:16; 10:6; 12:9; 14:9). In both the present and the future, the return of the Lord’s presence to Jerusalem was connected with the enabling work of God’s Spirit (4:6; 12:10; see also Hag 2:5).<\/p>\n<p>Zechariah’s promise of the Lord’s presence in Jerusalem anticipated the coming of Jesus the Messiah and the awesome mystery of the Word of God becoming human and living on earth among us (John 1:14).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 26:3; 31:3; Exod 3:12; Deut 31:23; Josh 1:5; Judg 6:16; Isa 7:14; 43:2; 52:8; Ezek 37:27; Joel 3:21; Hag 2:5; Zech 1:16-17; 2:5, 10-11; 4:6; 8:3, 23; 14:9; John 1:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Return of God’s Presence with His People<\/h3>\n<p>The descriptions of the Exile include the tragedy that, as part of his judgment, God withdrew his presence from his people and from the holy city of Jerusalem. This notion is perhaps most clearly demonstrated in a vision of the prophet Ezekiel, who saw a visual depiction of God’s glorious presence leaving the Temple (Ezek 10:1-22; 11:22-23). As such, when the prophets discussed the future restoration of God’s people and their return to the land, they also often spoke of the return of God’s presence (see, e.g., Isa 52:7-8; Ezek 43:1-9).<\/p>\n<p>The prophet Zechariah placed a strong emphasis on this theme of the Lord returning to his people. He was certain that God would once again live among them and that the glory of the Lord would rest in Jerusalem (1:16; 2:5, 10-11; 8:3, 23). God’s presence would return with the rebuilding of the Temple, and Israel would experience spiritual restoration and renewed agricultural bounty (1:17; 4:8-9; 6:15; see also Hag 2:19). In the future, God’s presence would rescue Jerusalem and the people of Israel from enemy nations. The Lord would be enthroned as King over all the earth, and the whole earth would worship the one true God (Zech 9:16; 10:6; 12:9; 14:9). In both the present and the future, the return of the Lord’s presence to Jerusalem was connected with the enabling work of God’s Spirit (4:6; 12:10; see also Hag 2:5).<\/p>\n<p>Zechariah’s promise of the Lord’s presence in Jerusalem anticipated the coming of Jesus the Messiah and the awesome mystery of the Word of God becoming human and living on earth among us (John 1:14).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 26:3; 31:3; Exod 3:12; Deut 31:23; Josh 1:5; Judg 6:16; Isa 7:14; 43:2; 52:8; Ezek 37:27; Joel 3:21; Hag 2:5; Zech 1:16-17; 2:5, 10-11; 4:6; 8:3, 23; 14:9; John 1:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Return of God’s Presence with His People The descriptions of the Exile include the tragedy that, as part of his judgment, God withdrew his presence from his people and from the holy city of Jerusalem. This notion is perhaps most clearly demonstrated in a vision of the prophet Ezekiel, who saw a visual depiction of God’s glorious presence leaving the Temple (Ezek 10:1-22; 11:22-23). As such, when the prophets discussed the future restoration of God’s people and their return to the land, th...","summary_en":"The Return of God’s Presence with His People The descriptions of the Exile include the tragedy that, as part of his judgment, God withdrew his presence from his people and from the holy city of Jerusalem. This notion is perhaps most clearly demonstrated in a vision of the prophet Ezekiel, who saw a visual depiction of God’s glorious presence leaving the Temple (Ezek 10:1-22; 11:22-23). As such, when the prophets discussed the future restoration of God’s people and their return to the land, th...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65805,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Word","title_en":"The Word","content_ro":"<h3>The Word<\/h3>\n<p>John raises the curtain on his Gospel with a stunning description of Jesus Christ as “the Word” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span><em>,<\/em> John 1:1). Both Greek and Jewish listeners in the first century would immediately recognize the profound meaning of this title. Greeks would have thought of the seminal forces that sustain the universe. Jewish minds would have thought back to God creating the world with his word (Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9). In Jesus’ day, the Word of God had taken on creative personal attributes. Jews viewed God’s Word as personifying divine Wisdom. Through Wisdom, God extended himself into the cosmos, creating the world (Prov 8:22-31).<\/p>\n<p>John makes it clear that Jesus shares the same essence as God; the Son existed before time, and he was the agent of all creation. John anchors the divinity of Jesus in this ancient Jewish concept of Wisdom. The divine Wisdom that has existed with God from before time can now be known in Jesus Christ. In perhaps the most striking verse penned by an apostle, John writes that this Logos, this Wisdom, became flesh and lived among us as a human (John 1:14). What God is, the Logos is, and the Logos is Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9; Prov 8:22-31; Isa 40:8; John 1:1-18; 1 Jn 1:1; Rev 19:13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Word<\/h3>\n<p>John raises the curtain on his Gospel with a stunning description of Jesus Christ as “the Word” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span><em>,<\/em> John 1:1). Both Greek and Jewish listeners in the first century would immediately recognize the profound meaning of this title. Greeks would have thought of the seminal forces that sustain the universe. Jewish minds would have thought back to God creating the world with his word (Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9). In Jesus’ day, the Word of God had taken on creative personal attributes. Jews viewed God’s Word as personifying divine Wisdom. Through Wisdom, God extended himself into the cosmos, creating the world (Prov 8:22-31).<\/p>\n<p>John makes it clear that Jesus shares the same essence as God; the Son existed before time, and he was the agent of all creation. John anchors the divinity of Jesus in this ancient Jewish concept of Wisdom. The divine Wisdom that has existed with God from before time can now be known in Jesus Christ. In perhaps the most striking verse penned by an apostle, John writes that this Logos, this Wisdom, became flesh and lived among us as a human (John 1:14). What God is, the Logos is, and the Logos is Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9; Prov 8:22-31; Isa 40:8; John 1:1-18; 1 Jn 1:1; Rev 19:13<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Word John raises the curtain on his Gospel with a stunning description of Jesus Christ as “the Word” (Greek logos, John 1:1). Both Greek and Jewish listeners in the first century would immediately recognize the profound meaning of this title. Greeks would have thought of the seminal forces that sustain the universe. Jewish minds would have thought back to God creating the world with his word (Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9). In Jesus’ day, the Word of God had taken on creative personal attributes...","summary_en":"The Word John raises the curtain on his Gospel with a stunning description of Jesus Christ as “the Word” (Greek logos, John 1:1). Both Greek and Jewish listeners in the first century would immediately recognize the profound meaning of this title. Greeks would have thought of the seminal forces that sustain the universe. Jewish minds would have thought back to God creating the world with his word (Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9). In Jesus’ day, the Word of God had taken on creative personal attributes...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66378,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miracles","title_en":"Miracles","content_ro":"<h3>Miracles<\/h3>\n<p>Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in more than the miracle itself (see John 12:37). Miracles remind us of the truth that anything is possible for God (Mark 9:21-23; cp. Matt 19:26; Mark 10:27; Luke 1:37; 18:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus performed many miracles during his ministry including physical healings, exorcisms, nature miracles, and raising the dead. Jesus demonstrated a deep love for humankind in the way he responded to people’s needs, and many people followed him in response to his miracles (John 6:2), though he cautioned against following him just because of the miracles (John 6:26). Perhaps the three greatest miracles that occurred in relation to Jesus are (1) his coming as the Word of God in human flesh (John 1:14), (2) his glorious resurrection from the dead (Matt 28; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-53; John 20:1-31; Acts 1:3; 1 Cor 15:3-8; cp Acts 23:6; 26:8), and (3) the miracle of the new birth (John 3:3-8; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:8-10). The coming of Jesus into the world to be the Savior and to die for our sins shows us how much God loves us (John 3:16; Rom 5:8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5; 1 Jn 3:1-2). The fact that God raised Jesus from the dead reveals God’s power over death and gives us a living hope, the promise of eternal life (1 Pet 1:3-9). And the person who puts faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord is born anew as a child of God and receives eternal life (John 1:12; 3:36; Rom 5:1-2; 1 Jn 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>The miraculous activity of Jesus continued in the work of his followers, as demonstrated throughout the book of Acts (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-15; 6:8; 8:6-7; 9:32-42; 14:3). Filled with the Holy Spirit, the apostles and other Christian leaders performed these miraculous signs, wonders, and mighty works, often in order to offer tangible evidence of the power and truth of the Christian message (14:3; see John 3:2; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 19:23-26; 28:1-20; Mark 10:23-27; Luke 1:30-38; 18:24-27; 24:1-53; John 1:12-14; 3:2-8, 16; 20:1–21:25; Acts 4:29-31; 5:12-16; 6:8; 8:4-23; 9:32-42; 14:3-4; 26:8; Rom 5:1, 8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5, 8-10; Heb 2:4; 1 Pet 1:3-5; 1 Jn 5:12-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miracles<\/h3>\n<p>Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in more than the miracle itself (see John 12:37). Miracles remind us of the truth that anything is possible for God (Mark 9:21-23; cp. Matt 19:26; Mark 10:27; Luke 1:37; 18:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus performed many miracles during his ministry including physical healings, exorcisms, nature miracles, and raising the dead. Jesus demonstrated a deep love for humankind in the way he responded to people’s needs, and many people followed him in response to his miracles (John 6:2), though he cautioned against following him just because of the miracles (John 6:26). Perhaps the three greatest miracles that occurred in relation to Jesus are (1) his coming as the Word of God in human flesh (John 1:14), (2) his glorious resurrection from the dead (Matt 28; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-53; John 20:1-31; Acts 1:3; 1 Cor 15:3-8; cp Acts 23:6; 26:8), and (3) the miracle of the new birth (John 3:3-8; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:8-10). The coming of Jesus into the world to be the Savior and to die for our sins shows us how much God loves us (John 3:16; Rom 5:8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5; 1 Jn 3:1-2). The fact that God raised Jesus from the dead reveals God’s power over death and gives us a living hope, the promise of eternal life (1 Pet 1:3-9). And the person who puts faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord is born anew as a child of God and receives eternal life (John 1:12; 3:36; Rom 5:1-2; 1 Jn 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>The miraculous activity of Jesus continued in the work of his followers, as demonstrated throughout the book of Acts (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-15; 6:8; 8:6-7; 9:32-42; 14:3). Filled with the Holy Spirit, the apostles and other Christian leaders performed these miraculous signs, wonders, and mighty works, often in order to offer tangible evidence of the power and truth of the Christian message (14:3; see John 3:2; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 19:23-26; 28:1-20; Mark 10:23-27; Luke 1:30-38; 18:24-27; 24:1-53; John 1:12-14; 3:2-8, 16; 20:1–21:25; Acts 4:29-31; 5:12-16; 6:8; 8:4-23; 9:32-42; 14:3-4; 26:8; Rom 5:1, 8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5, 8-10; Heb 2:4; 1 Pet 1:3-5; 1 Jn 5:12-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miracles Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in ...","summary_en":"Miracles Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66537,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Grace of God","title_en":"The Grace of God","content_ro":"<h3>The Grace of God<\/h3>\n<p><em>Grace<\/em> is a key word in the Bible. It is used to indicate God’s kindness and favor, often in terms of salvation to the undeserving. The New Testament stresses that grace came through Jesus Christ (John 1:14-17). This is not to say that God’s grace was not active in the Old Testament; rather, God’s gracious activity toward humanity reached its culmination through his Son.<\/p>\n<p>According to the book of Acts, God’s great favor was initially experienced in the Jewish community (see Acts 11:19-21; 13:43-49); later, it became clear that God’s grace in Jesus Christ extends to Gentiles as well (Acts 15:8-9; Eph 2:11-18; Titus 2:11). Signs and wonders attested the reality of God’s grace at work among the Gentiles (Acts 14:3).<\/p>\n<p>Paul proclaimed the Good News “about the wonderful grace of God” (Acts 20:24). Paul never seeks to prove that God is gracious, but he assumes it as a fact when he presents the Good News (see, e.g., Rom 3:24; 5:15-21). Paul rules out any idea that we merit our salvation, because God acts solely by his grace (Rom 4:4-5; Eph 2:4-9). Our good works do not give us right standing with God—if they did, God would be obliged to reward us for our efforts, just as a worker earns a wage (see Rom 11:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>God’s grace continues to impact believers throughout their lives—not just in the moment of conversion. Second Peter closes with a command for Christians to “grow in the grace” of Jesus Christ (2 Pet 3:18). Paul encouraged Christians to “continue to rely on the grace of God” as they remained faithful to their Lord (Acts 13:43). And when Paul left the Ephesian elders, he commended them “to God and the message of his grace,” the divine message that was able to build them up and sustain them (Acts 20:32; see 15:40). God’s grace is at the core of the Christian message and the Christian experience, from beginning to end. It is no wonder that the theme of grace is so prevalent in the writings of Jesus’ early followers.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 34:5-7; Num 6:22-27; Ezra 9:8; Pss 30:5; 31:16; Ps 84:11; Isa 60:10; 61:1-3; Hos 14:1-9; Luke 4:18-19; Acts 15:11; 20:24; Rom 5:15-17, 20-21; 12:6; 2 Cor 6:1; 8:9; 12:9; Gal 2:21; 4:10; 5:3-6; Eph 1:3-8; 2:4-10; 2 Tim 1:9; 2:1; Titus 2:11; 3:7; Heb 2:9; 4:16; 13:9; Jas 4:6; 1 Pet 5:5-6, 12; 2 Pet 3:17-18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Grace of God<\/h3>\n<p><em>Grace<\/em> is a key word in the Bible. It is used to indicate God’s kindness and favor, often in terms of salvation to the undeserving. The New Testament stresses that grace came through Jesus Christ (John 1:14-17). This is not to say that God’s grace was not active in the Old Testament; rather, God’s gracious activity toward humanity reached its culmination through his Son.<\/p>\n<p>According to the book of Acts, God’s great favor was initially experienced in the Jewish community (see Acts 11:19-21; 13:43-49); later, it became clear that God’s grace in Jesus Christ extends to Gentiles as well (Acts 15:8-9; Eph 2:11-18; Titus 2:11). Signs and wonders attested the reality of God’s grace at work among the Gentiles (Acts 14:3).<\/p>\n<p>Paul proclaimed the Good News “about the wonderful grace of God” (Acts 20:24). Paul never seeks to prove that God is gracious, but he assumes it as a fact when he presents the Good News (see, e.g., Rom 3:24; 5:15-21). Paul rules out any idea that we merit our salvation, because God acts solely by his grace (Rom 4:4-5; Eph 2:4-9). Our good works do not give us right standing with God—if they did, God would be obliged to reward us for our efforts, just as a worker earns a wage (see Rom 11:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>God’s grace continues to impact believers throughout their lives—not just in the moment of conversion. Second Peter closes with a command for Christians to “grow in the grace” of Jesus Christ (2 Pet 3:18). Paul encouraged Christians to “continue to rely on the grace of God” as they remained faithful to their Lord (Acts 13:43). And when Paul left the Ephesian elders, he commended them “to God and the message of his grace,” the divine message that was able to build them up and sustain them (Acts 20:32; see 15:40). God’s grace is at the core of the Christian message and the Christian experience, from beginning to end. It is no wonder that the theme of grace is so prevalent in the writings of Jesus’ early followers.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 34:5-7; Num 6:22-27; Ezra 9:8; Pss 30:5; 31:16; Ps 84:11; Isa 60:10; 61:1-3; Hos 14:1-9; Luke 4:18-19; Acts 15:11; 20:24; Rom 5:15-17, 20-21; 12:6; 2 Cor 6:1; 8:9; 12:9; Gal 2:21; 4:10; 5:3-6; Eph 1:3-8; 2:4-10; 2 Tim 1:9; 2:1; Titus 2:11; 3:7; Heb 2:9; 4:16; 13:9; Jas 4:6; 1 Pet 5:5-6, 12; 2 Pet 3:17-18<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Grace of God Grace is a key word in the Bible. It is used to indicate God’s kindness and favor, often in terms of salvation to the undeserving. The New Testament stresses that grace came through Jesus Christ (John 1:14-17). This is not to say that God’s grace was not active in the Old Testament; rather, God’s gracious activity toward humanity reached its culmination through his Son. According to the book of Acts, God’s great favor was initially experienced in the Jewish community (see Act...","summary_en":"The Grace of God Grace is a key word in the Bible. It is used to indicate God’s kindness and favor, often in terms of salvation to the undeserving. The New Testament stresses that grace came through Jesus Christ (John 1:14-17). This is not to say that God’s grace was not active in the Old Testament; rather, God’s gracious activity toward humanity reached its culmination through his Son. According to the book of Acts, God’s great favor was initially experienced in the Jewish community (see Act...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":67197,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Church as God’s Temple","title_en":"The Church as God’s Temple","content_ro":"<h3>The Church as God’s Temple<\/h3>\n<p>The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 <span>BC<\/span> but was destroyed in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7; Ezek 40–43).<\/p>\n<p>While the Temple in Jerusalem was rebuilt after the Exile—and reached a pinnacle during the renovations of Herod the Great—the hopes of God’s people were ultimately fulfilled in the coming of Jesus (see John 1:14; 2:19-22; 4:21-24). He himself is God’s temple, the place where God’s holiness resides, and he calls his people to join him. Thus, God’s people are to be a holy temple of God, a dwelling place for the Holy Spirit (see 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; 1 Pet 2:5; Rev 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>Paul called on believers to realize their identity as God’s “holy people” (2 Cor 1:1) in two ways: They were to separate themselves from moral evil, and they were to be dedicated to God in holy living and service. Christians are therefore urged, “Let us cleanse ourselves from everything that can defile our body or spirit. And let us work toward complete holiness because we fear God” (2 Cor 7:1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 8:12-53; 2 Chr 6:20; Pss 11:4; 27:4-6; Zech 6:12-15; Matt 18:20; John 2:18-22; 14:20; 17:23; Rom 8:10; 1 Cor 3:10-17; 6:18-20; 9:11-14; 2 Cor 6:14–7:1; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:20-22; 3:17-19; Col 1:27; Heb 3:6; 12:18-24; 1 Pet 2:4-9; Rev 1:12-16; 3:12, 20; 21:22<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Church as God’s Temple<\/h3>\n<p>The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 <span>BC<\/span> but was destroyed in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7; Ezek 40–43).<\/p>\n<p>While the Temple in Jerusalem was rebuilt after the Exile—and reached a pinnacle during the renovations of Herod the Great—the hopes of God’s people were ultimately fulfilled in the coming of Jesus (see John 1:14; 2:19-22; 4:21-24). He himself is God’s temple, the place where God’s holiness resides, and he calls his people to join him. Thus, God’s people are to be a holy temple of God, a dwelling place for the Holy Spirit (see 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; 1 Pet 2:5; Rev 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>Paul called on believers to realize their identity as God’s “holy people” (2 Cor 1:1) in two ways: They were to separate themselves from moral evil, and they were to be dedicated to God in holy living and service. Christians are therefore urged, “Let us cleanse ourselves from everything that can defile our body or spirit. And let us work toward complete holiness because we fear God” (2 Cor 7:1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 8:12-53; 2 Chr 6:20; Pss 11:4; 27:4-6; Zech 6:12-15; Matt 18:20; John 2:18-22; 14:20; 17:23; Rom 8:10; 1 Cor 3:10-17; 6:18-20; 9:11-14; 2 Cor 6:14–7:1; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:20-22; 3:17-19; Col 1:27; Heb 3:6; 12:18-24; 1 Pet 2:4-9; Rev 1:12-16; 3:12, 20; 21:22<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Church as God’s Temple The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 BC but was destroyed in 586 BC. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7;...","summary_en":"The Church as God’s Temple The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 BC but was destroyed in 586 BC. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7;...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":67828,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The New Community","title_en":"The New Community","content_ro":"<h3>The New Community<\/h3>\n<p>The New Testament draws attention to the importance of the Christian community, an emphasis that sometimes gets lost in individualistic cultures. Though believers in Christ are individually converted and born again to a new life (John 3:3; 1 Pet 1:23), we are not intended to remain in isolation. God’s purpose is to build us together as “living stones” in his “spiritual temple” (1 Pet 2:5). God no longer inhabits a building on Mount Zion in Jerusalem; he now lives in and among his people by the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>The promise that God would rebuild his temple (see Ezek 40–48) has been fulfilled as God dwells among his people (see John 1:14), who themselves constitute the “temple” under the new covenant. Only as we join together in worship, praise, and service will we function in the way God intended. Christians enjoy together the wonderful blessing of being the people God has chosen to carry out his mission to the world.<\/p>\n<p>As 1 Peter 2:9 makes clear, the church is now what Israel was originally, a “chosen people” (see Deut 7:6), “royal priests,” “a holy nation” (see Exod 19:6), and God’s “very own possession” (see Exod 19:5). With that privileged status comes the responsibility to proclaim God to the nations. As we join in harmonious worship and together serve in various ministries, we “show others the goodness of God” (1 Pet 2:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:3; Exod 19:4-6; Deut 7:6; 2 Chr 5:13-14; Isa 11:1-16; John 1:14; 1 Cor 3:9-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16-18; Eph 2:19-22; 1 Pet 2:4-10; Rev 3:12; 21:1-3, 22<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The New Community<\/h3>\n<p>The New Testament draws attention to the importance of the Christian community, an emphasis that sometimes gets lost in individualistic cultures. Though believers in Christ are individually converted and born again to a new life (John 3:3; 1 Pet 1:23), we are not intended to remain in isolation. God’s purpose is to build us together as “living stones” in his “spiritual temple” (1 Pet 2:5). God no longer inhabits a building on Mount Zion in Jerusalem; he now lives in and among his people by the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>The promise that God would rebuild his temple (see Ezek 40–48) has been fulfilled as God dwells among his people (see John 1:14), who themselves constitute the “temple” under the new covenant. Only as we join together in worship, praise, and service will we function in the way God intended. Christians enjoy together the wonderful blessing of being the people God has chosen to carry out his mission to the world.<\/p>\n<p>As 1 Peter 2:9 makes clear, the church is now what Israel was originally, a “chosen people” (see Deut 7:6), “royal priests,” “a holy nation” (see Exod 19:6), and God’s “very own possession” (see Exod 19:5). With that privileged status comes the responsibility to proclaim God to the nations. As we join in harmonious worship and together serve in various ministries, we “show others the goodness of God” (1 Pet 2:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:3; Exod 19:4-6; Deut 7:6; 2 Chr 5:13-14; Isa 11:1-16; John 1:14; 1 Cor 3:9-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16-18; Eph 2:19-22; 1 Pet 2:4-10; Rev 3:12; 21:1-3, 22<\/p>","summary_ro":"The New Community The New Testament draws attention to the importance of the Christian community, an emphasis that sometimes gets lost in individualistic cultures. Though believers in Christ are individually converted and born again to a new life (John 3:3; 1 Pet 1:23), we are not intended to remain in isolation. God’s purpose is to build us together as “living stones” in his “spiritual temple” (1 Pet 2:5). God no longer inhabits a building on Mount Zion in Jerusalem; he now lives in and amon...","summary_en":"The New Community The New Testament draws attention to the importance of the Christian community, an emphasis that sometimes gets lost in individualistic cultures. Though believers in Christ are individually converted and born again to a new life (John 3:3; 1 Pet 1:23), we are not intended to remain in isolation. God’s purpose is to build us together as “living stones” in his “spiritual temple” (1 Pet 2:5). God no longer inhabits a building on Mount Zion in Jerusalem; he now lives in and amon...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88352,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Cloud and Fire","title_en":"The Cloud and Fire","content_ro":"<h3>The Cloud and Fire<\/h3>\n<p>When Israel was in the wilderness, God led the nation with a pillar of cloud and fire. The pillar joined the Israelites right after the first Passover, immediately after Israel left Egypt (Exod 13:20-22).<\/p>\n<p>The pillar served a variety of functions. When the Egyptians pursued the Israelites, the cloud moved behind the people of Israel and prevented an Egyptian advance (Exod 14:19-20). Through the rest of Israel’s travels, it was a visible indication that “the <span>Lord<\/span> went ahead of them” (Exod 13:21). When the pillar settled over the Tabernacle and the camp of Israel, it represented the Lord’s presence and protection. The cloud and fire also provided divine guidance by indicating when the Israelites should move (Exod 40:36-38; Num 9:17-23). When the pillar was stationary, Israel stayed where they were. When it lifted and moved on, the Israelites broke camp and followed. They camped in different places for varying amounts of time, sometimes briefly and sometimes for a longer period. Israel thus “camped or traveled at the <span>Lord<\/span>’s command” (Num 9:23). The pillar of cloud and fire was like a divine banner flying over the tribes on the march (cp. 10:14, 18, 22, 25).<\/p>\n<p>The pillar regularly appeared as a cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night (9:15-16; Exod 13:21). In the Bible, both fire and clouds often indicate the presence and glory of God (e.g., Exod 19:16-18; 24:15-18; Matt 17:5; 24:30; Acts 1:9; cp. Ps 18:8-13). The cloud and fire imagery indicated that God’s presence and glory moved with Israel through the wilderness. This special manifestation of God (a <em>theophany<\/em>) stayed with them “throughout all their journeys” while they were in the wilderness (Exod 40:38; see also Exod 13:22). Sometimes, “the cloud covered the Tabernacle, and the glory of the <span>Lord<\/span> filled the Tabernacle,” so that “Moses could no longer enter the Tabernacle” (Exod 40:34-35). On other occasions, the cloud descended and hovered near the entrance to the Tent of Meeting, indicating that the Lord was speaking with Moses “face to face” (Exod 33:7-11; cp. Num 11:25; 12:5; Deut 31:15). The pillar of cloud and fire was a constant, reassuring reminder of the Lord’s presence. We are not given any specific description of the fire and the cloud other than that it was shaped like a pillar; regardless, it was a powerful symbol of God’s special care for Israel (see Neh 9:19-21; cp. Pss 46:1; 139; John 1:14; Rom 8:31-39).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 13:20-22; 14:19-24; 16:10; 19:16-18; 24:15-18; 33:7-11; 40:34-38; Lev 16:2; Num 9:15-23; 10:11-12, 34; 11:25; 12:5, 10; 14:14; 16:42; Deut 31:15; 1 Kgs 8:11; 2 Chr 5:14; Neh 9:19-21; Pss 78:14; 99:7; 104:3; Ezek 1:4-5; 10:3; Matt 17:5; 24:30; 26:64; Luke 9:34-35; Acts 1:9; 1 Cor 10:2; 1 Thes 4:17; Rev 1:7; 14:14-16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Cloud and Fire<\/h3>\n<p>When Israel was in the wilderness, God led the nation with a pillar of cloud and fire. The pillar joined the Israelites right after the first Passover, immediately after Israel left Egypt (Exod 13:20-22).<\/p>\n<p>The pillar served a variety of functions. When the Egyptians pursued the Israelites, the cloud moved behind the people of Israel and prevented an Egyptian advance (Exod 14:19-20). Through the rest of Israel’s travels, it was a visible indication that “the <span>Lord<\/span> went ahead of them” (Exod 13:21). When the pillar settled over the Tabernacle and the camp of Israel, it represented the Lord’s presence and protection. The cloud and fire also provided divine guidance by indicating when the Israelites should move (Exod 40:36-38; Num 9:17-23). When the pillar was stationary, Israel stayed where they were. When it lifted and moved on, the Israelites broke camp and followed. They camped in different places for varying amounts of time, sometimes briefly and sometimes for a longer period. Israel thus “camped or traveled at the <span>Lord<\/span>’s command” (Num 9:23). The pillar of cloud and fire was like a divine banner flying over the tribes on the march (cp. 10:14, 18, 22, 25).<\/p>\n<p>The pillar regularly appeared as a cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night (9:15-16; Exod 13:21). In the Bible, both fire and clouds often indicate the presence and glory of God (e.g., Exod 19:16-18; 24:15-18; Matt 17:5; 24:30; Acts 1:9; cp. Ps 18:8-13). The cloud and fire imagery indicated that God’s presence and glory moved with Israel through the wilderness. This special manifestation of God (a <em>theophany<\/em>) stayed with them “throughout all their journeys” while they were in the wilderness (Exod 40:38; see also Exod 13:22). Sometimes, “the cloud covered the Tabernacle, and the glory of the <span>Lord<\/span> filled the Tabernacle,” so that “Moses could no longer enter the Tabernacle” (Exod 40:34-35). On other occasions, the cloud descended and hovered near the entrance to the Tent of Meeting, indicating that the Lord was speaking with Moses “face to face” (Exod 33:7-11; cp. Num 11:25; 12:5; Deut 31:15). The pillar of cloud and fire was a constant, reassuring reminder of the Lord’s presence. We are not given any specific description of the fire and the cloud other than that it was shaped like a pillar; regardless, it was a powerful symbol of God’s special care for Israel (see Neh 9:19-21; cp. Pss 46:1; 139; John 1:14; Rom 8:31-39).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 13:20-22; 14:19-24; 16:10; 19:16-18; 24:15-18; 33:7-11; 40:34-38; Lev 16:2; Num 9:15-23; 10:11-12, 34; 11:25; 12:5, 10; 14:14; 16:42; Deut 31:15; 1 Kgs 8:11; 2 Chr 5:14; Neh 9:19-21; Pss 78:14; 99:7; 104:3; Ezek 1:4-5; 10:3; Matt 17:5; 24:30; 26:64; Luke 9:34-35; Acts 1:9; 1 Cor 10:2; 1 Thes 4:17; Rev 1:7; 14:14-16<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Cloud and Fire When Israel was in the wilderness, God led the nation with a pillar of cloud and fire. The pillar joined the Israelites right after the first Passover, immediately after Israel left Egypt (Exod 13:20-22). The pillar served a variety of functions. When the Egyptians pursued the Israelites, the cloud moved behind the people of Israel and prevented an Egyptian advance (Exod 14:19-20). Through the rest of Israel’s travels, it was a visible indication that “the Lord went ahead o...","summary_en":"The Cloud and Fire When Israel was in the wilderness, God led the nation with a pillar of cloud and fire. The pillar joined the Israelites right after the first Passover, immediately after Israel left Egypt (Exod 13:20-22). The pillar served a variety of functions. When the Egyptians pursued the Israelites, the cloud moved behind the people of Israel and prevented an Egyptian advance (Exod 14:19-20). Through the rest of Israel’s travels, it was a visible indication that “the Lord went ahead o...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88409,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Central Sanctuary","title_en":"The Central Sanctuary","content_ro":"<h3>The Central Sanctuary<\/h3>\n<p>God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>God is <em>transcendent<\/em> (above all things) and <em>omnipresent<\/em> (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple belonged to him and bore his name, so they were, in a sense, his dwelling places. In the ancient Near East, names were more than labels. They represented the character and nature of the named individuals (e.g., Jacob, Gen 27:36; Jesus, Matt 1:21; Barnabas, Acts 4:36; Peter, Matt 16:17-19). Thus Solomon could advise, “Choose a good reputation [<em>name<\/em>] over great riches” (Prov 22:1).<\/p>\n<p>God made his home in a sanctuary that bore his name. His glorious presence manifested in fire and cloud during the wilderness wanderings served as a constant reminder that he was at home among his people (Exod 40:34-35); likewise, upon the completion of the Temple, his presence was evidenced (1 Kgs 8:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>God would later come to dwell among his people in the person of Jesus Christ (John 1:14), thereby eliminating the need for a central sanctuary (see John 4:19-24). And now, because of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, all believers are able to house God’s presence (1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:8-9, 22, 40; 26:30; 33:7-11; 40:34-35; Num 7:1; 11:16; Deut 12:4-7; 31:14-15; 1 Kgs 8:10-11, 27; John 1:14; 2:19-21; Acts 7:44; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; Heb 8:2, 5; Rev 21:22<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Central Sanctuary<\/h3>\n<p>God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>God is <em>transcendent<\/em> (above all things) and <em>omnipresent<\/em> (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple belonged to him and bore his name, so they were, in a sense, his dwelling places. In the ancient Near East, names were more than labels. They represented the character and nature of the named individuals (e.g., Jacob, Gen 27:36; Jesus, Matt 1:21; Barnabas, Acts 4:36; Peter, Matt 16:17-19). Thus Solomon could advise, “Choose a good reputation [<em>name<\/em>] over great riches” (Prov 22:1).<\/p>\n<p>God made his home in a sanctuary that bore his name. His glorious presence manifested in fire and cloud during the wilderness wanderings served as a constant reminder that he was at home among his people (Exod 40:34-35); likewise, upon the completion of the Temple, his presence was evidenced (1 Kgs 8:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>God would later come to dwell among his people in the person of Jesus Christ (John 1:14), thereby eliminating the need for a central sanctuary (see John 4:19-24). And now, because of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, all believers are able to house God’s presence (1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:8-9, 22, 40; 26:30; 33:7-11; 40:34-35; Num 7:1; 11:16; Deut 12:4-7; 31:14-15; 1 Kgs 8:10-11, 27; John 1:14; 2:19-21; Acts 7:44; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; Heb 8:2, 5; Rev 21:22<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Central Sanctuary God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem. God is transcendent (above all things) and omnipresent (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple ...","summary_en":"The Central Sanctuary God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem. God is transcendent (above all things) and omnipresent (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":89061,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Jerusalem","title_en":"Jerusalem","content_ro":"<h3>Jerusalem<\/h3>\n<p>Jerusalem was a functioning city as early as four hundred years before the time of David. It was never fully captured during the conquest and the period of the judges (Josh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21), and peaceful relations were evidently established between the autonomous Jebusite enclave and the surrounding Israelites (Judg 19:10-12). So impregnable was Jerusalem that the Old Testament records only three successful invaders: David, Jehoash (2 Kgs 14:11-14), and Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon (2 Kgs 25:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Whatever David’s method of capturing Jerusalem (his use of a water tunnel is debatable—see study note on 5:8), he secured Jerusalem as the political, and eventually spiritual, capital of Israel. Psalm 48 speaks beautifully and powerfully of Jerusalem as a fortress. Its towers, bulwarks, and easily defensible citadels with their rugged terrain could produce a false sense of security, if not idolatry. Psalm 48:1-3 reminds the reader that God’s living presence, not the topography of the city, made Jerusalem safe.<\/p>\n<p>Both the Old Testament and the New Testament call Jerusalem a “holy city” (see Neh 11:1, 18; Isa 52:1; Dan 9:24; Matt 4:5; 27:53; Rev 21:2). It is the only city so described in the Bible. Wherein lies this city’s holiness? It cannot be a reflection of the holiness of its occupants. In fact, so unholy was the populace that the city was decimated by the Babylonians in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. Nor was it a holy city because it was Israel’s capital for several centuries. Jerusalem was a holy city, first of all, because God chose it (1 Kgs 8:44, 48; 11:13, 32, 36; 2 Chr 6:5, 34). And because he chose it, he put his glory and his name there (see 1 Kgs 14:21; 2 Chr 12:13; Ezek 8–10; 43:1-27).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels and Acts, Jerusalem was still a city of great importance. Herod the Great (37–4 <span>BC<\/span>) had expanded the city and conducted extensive building projects—including the Temple. It remained the center of Israel’s spiritual life (see e.g., Acts 2:46; 3:1-26; 5:12), and many events in the lives of Jesus and his followers occurred in Jerusalem. Jesus had some harsh words for Jerusalem (see Matt 23:37-39)—especially its leadership—and he was eventually put to death there. Jesus warned of impending judgment on the city (see Mark 13:1-2; Luke 21:20-24), and his words were actualized in the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans in <span>AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\n<p>But the New Testament also introduces the new Jerusalem, the heavenly city comprised of God’s holy people (Heb 11:10; Rev 3:12; 21:2). As the earthly Jerusalem was the sphere in which the glorious presence and reign of God was partially actualized through King David and his successors, the new Jerusalem represents the government of Jesus Christ, the son of David, and his everlasting presence with his people (cp. John 1:14; Rev 21:3).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Josh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21; 2 Sam 5:6-9; 1 Kgs 8:1; 2 Kgs 18:13-17; 25:1-10; 2 Chr 3:1; 12:1-12; 26:9, 15; 32:1-5, 27-30; Ezra 1:1-6; Neh 1:1–6:19; Ps 48:1-3; 125:2; Isa 14:32; 52:1-3; Gal 4:25-26; Heb 12:22-24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jerusalem<\/h3>\n<p>Jerusalem was a functioning city as early as four hundred years before the time of David. It was never fully captured during the conquest and the period of the judges (Josh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21), and peaceful relations were evidently established between the autonomous Jebusite enclave and the surrounding Israelites (Judg 19:10-12). So impregnable was Jerusalem that the Old Testament records only three successful invaders: David, Jehoash (2 Kgs 14:11-14), and Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon (2 Kgs 25:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Whatever David’s method of capturing Jerusalem (his use of a water tunnel is debatable—see study note on 5:8), he secured Jerusalem as the political, and eventually spiritual, capital of Israel. Psalm 48 speaks beautifully and powerfully of Jerusalem as a fortress. Its towers, bulwarks, and easily defensible citadels with their rugged terrain could produce a false sense of security, if not idolatry. Psalm 48:1-3 reminds the reader that God’s living presence, not the topography of the city, made Jerusalem safe.<\/p>\n<p>Both the Old Testament and the New Testament call Jerusalem a “holy city” (see Neh 11:1, 18; Isa 52:1; Dan 9:24; Matt 4:5; 27:53; Rev 21:2). It is the only city so described in the Bible. Wherein lies this city’s holiness? It cannot be a reflection of the holiness of its occupants. In fact, so unholy was the populace that the city was decimated by the Babylonians in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. Nor was it a holy city because it was Israel’s capital for several centuries. Jerusalem was a holy city, first of all, because God chose it (1 Kgs 8:44, 48; 11:13, 32, 36; 2 Chr 6:5, 34). And because he chose it, he put his glory and his name there (see 1 Kgs 14:21; 2 Chr 12:13; Ezek 8–10; 43:1-27).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels and Acts, Jerusalem was still a city of great importance. Herod the Great (37–4 <span>BC<\/span>) had expanded the city and conducted extensive building projects—including the Temple. It remained the center of Israel’s spiritual life (see e.g., Acts 2:46; 3:1-26; 5:12), and many events in the lives of Jesus and his followers occurred in Jerusalem. Jesus had some harsh words for Jerusalem (see Matt 23:37-39)—especially its leadership—and he was eventually put to death there. Jesus warned of impending judgment on the city (see Mark 13:1-2; Luke 21:20-24), and his words were actualized in the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans in <span>AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\n<p>But the New Testament also introduces the new Jerusalem, the heavenly city comprised of God’s holy people (Heb 11:10; Rev 3:12; 21:2). As the earthly Jerusalem was the sphere in which the glorious presence and reign of God was partially actualized through King David and his successors, the new Jerusalem represents the government of Jesus Christ, the son of David, and his everlasting presence with his people (cp. John 1:14; Rev 21:3).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Josh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21; 2 Sam 5:6-9; 1 Kgs 8:1; 2 Kgs 18:13-17; 25:1-10; 2 Chr 3:1; 12:1-12; 26:9, 15; 32:1-5, 27-30; Ezra 1:1-6; Neh 1:1–6:19; Ps 48:1-3; 125:2; Isa 14:32; 52:1-3; Gal 4:25-26; Heb 12:22-24<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jerusalem Jerusalem was a functioning city as early as four hundred years before the time of David. It was never fully captured during the conquest and the period of the judges (Josh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21), and peaceful relations were evidently established between the autonomous Jebusite enclave and the surrounding Israelites (Judg 19:10-12). So impregnable was Jerusalem that the Old Testament records only three successful invaders: David, Jehoash (2 Kgs 14:11-14), and Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon...","summary_en":"Jerusalem Jerusalem was a functioning city as early as four hundred years before the time of David. It was never fully captured during the conquest and the period of the judges (Josh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21), and peaceful relations were evidently established between the autonomous Jebusite enclave and the surrounding Israelites (Judg 19:10-12). So impregnable was Jerusalem that the Old Testament records only three successful invaders: David, Jehoash (2 Kgs 14:11-14), and Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":91973,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Glory with His People","title_en":"God’s Glory with His People","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Glory with His People<\/h3>\n<p>In ancient Israel, God’s glory was particularly manifest at the central sanctuaries that had been built for him. When the Israelites completed construction of the Tabernacle, that sacred space became filled with the glory of the Lord (Exod 40:34-35). Likewise, after the Temple was completed and the Ark of the Covenant was brought in, God’s glorious presence filled the Temple (1 Kgs 8:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>The presence and absence of God’s glory is a central theme in the book of Ezekiel. God’s glory appears to the prophet Ezekiel while he is exiled in Babylon, meaning that his glory was no longer present at the Temple in Jerusalem. The reason God’s glory had departed from the Temple at that time becomes clear in Ezekiel’s vision in Ezekiel 8–11, in which the prophet sees the abominations that had polluted the Temple in Jerusalem. Without God’s presence, the Temple had become an empty shell awaiting destruction. God was not forcibly evicted by the superior might of the Babylonian army; he voluntarily departed because his people were defiled. Their sin drove him away from the land he had promised to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. For a time, the Lord went from Jerusalem to Babylon to become a sanctuary for the exiles there (see 11:16).<\/p>\n<p>God would not abandon his Temple forever. After pouring out his wrath in full measure, he would restore a remnant to their land and sanctify them by his Spirit so that he could once again dwell in their midst in a new sanctuary (37:26). God’s glory, dwelling among his people forever (43:1-5), is at the heart of Ezekiel’s vision of their restoration.<\/p>\n<p>The glory of God has come to live among us fully in the person of Jesus Christ. As John testifies, “We have seen his glory, the glory of the Father’s one and only Son” (John 1:14). The aged Simeon saw the baby Jesus brought to the Temple and described him as “a light to reveal God to the nations, and . . . the glory of your people Israel” (Luke 2:32). Jesus’ glory was veiled while he was on earth, though for a moment on the Mount of Transfiguration his radiance was revealed to his closest disciples (Matt 17:2). He experienced his own abandonment by God as he hung on the cross, bearing the curse for our sin (Matt 27:46). Now, as the exalted and glorified Lord, he sits at God’s right hand (Eph 1:19-20). By his Spirit, he has promised never to abandon us, but to be with us to the end of time (Matt 28:20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 15:11; 33:18–34:8; 40:34; Ps 19:1-11; Isa 4:5-6; 6:3; 40:5; 42:8; 43:7; 58:8; 60:1-2; Ezek 1:1-28; 11:16; 37:26; 43:1-5; 44:4; Hab 2:14; Matt 17:2; 28:20; Luke 2:32; John 1:14; 2 Cor 4:4-6; Heb 1:3; Rev 21:10-11, 23<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Glory with His People<\/h3>\n<p>In ancient Israel, God’s glory was particularly manifest at the central sanctuaries that had been built for him. When the Israelites completed construction of the Tabernacle, that sacred space became filled with the glory of the Lord (Exod 40:34-35). Likewise, after the Temple was completed and the Ark of the Covenant was brought in, God’s glorious presence filled the Temple (1 Kgs 8:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>The presence and absence of God’s glory is a central theme in the book of Ezekiel. God’s glory appears to the prophet Ezekiel while he is exiled in Babylon, meaning that his glory was no longer present at the Temple in Jerusalem. The reason God’s glory had departed from the Temple at that time becomes clear in Ezekiel’s vision in Ezekiel 8–11, in which the prophet sees the abominations that had polluted the Temple in Jerusalem. Without God’s presence, the Temple had become an empty shell awaiting destruction. God was not forcibly evicted by the superior might of the Babylonian army; he voluntarily departed because his people were defiled. Their sin drove him away from the land he had promised to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. For a time, the Lord went from Jerusalem to Babylon to become a sanctuary for the exiles there (see 11:16).<\/p>\n<p>God would not abandon his Temple forever. After pouring out his wrath in full measure, he would restore a remnant to their land and sanctify them by his Spirit so that he could once again dwell in their midst in a new sanctuary (37:26). God’s glory, dwelling among his people forever (43:1-5), is at the heart of Ezekiel’s vision of their restoration.<\/p>\n<p>The glory of God has come to live among us fully in the person of Jesus Christ. As John testifies, “We have seen his glory, the glory of the Father’s one and only Son” (John 1:14). The aged Simeon saw the baby Jesus brought to the Temple and described him as “a light to reveal God to the nations, and . . . the glory of your people Israel” (Luke 2:32). Jesus’ glory was veiled while he was on earth, though for a moment on the Mount of Transfiguration his radiance was revealed to his closest disciples (Matt 17:2). He experienced his own abandonment by God as he hung on the cross, bearing the curse for our sin (Matt 27:46). Now, as the exalted and glorified Lord, he sits at God’s right hand (Eph 1:19-20). By his Spirit, he has promised never to abandon us, but to be with us to the end of time (Matt 28:20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 15:11; 33:18–34:8; 40:34; Ps 19:1-11; Isa 4:5-6; 6:3; 40:5; 42:8; 43:7; 58:8; 60:1-2; Ezek 1:1-28; 11:16; 37:26; 43:1-5; 44:4; Hab 2:14; Matt 17:2; 28:20; Luke 2:32; John 1:14; 2 Cor 4:4-6; Heb 1:3; Rev 21:10-11, 23<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Glory with His People In ancient Israel, God’s glory was particularly manifest at the central sanctuaries that had been built for him. When the Israelites completed construction of the Tabernacle, that sacred space became filled with the glory of the Lord (Exod 40:34-35). Likewise, after the Temple was completed and the Ark of the Covenant was brought in, God’s glorious presence filled the Temple (1 Kgs 8:10-11). The presence and absence of God’s glory is a central theme in the book of ...","summary_en":"God’s Glory with His People In ancient Israel, God’s glory was particularly manifest at the central sanctuaries that had been built for him. When the Israelites completed construction of the Tabernacle, that sacred space became filled with the glory of the Lord (Exod 40:34-35). Likewise, after the Temple was completed and the Ark of the Covenant was brought in, God’s glorious presence filled the Temple (1 Kgs 8:10-11). The presence and absence of God’s glory is a central theme in the book of ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92449,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Return of God’s Presence with His People","title_en":"The Return of God’s Presence with His People","content_ro":"<h3>The Return of God’s Presence with His People<\/h3>\n<p>The descriptions of the Exile include the tragedy that, as part of his judgment, God withdrew his presence from his people and from the holy city of Jerusalem. This notion is perhaps most clearly demonstrated in a vision of the prophet Ezekiel, who saw a visual depiction of God’s glorious presence leaving the Temple (Ezek 10:1-22; 11:22-23). As such, when the prophets discussed the future restoration of God’s people and their return to the land, they also often spoke of the return of God’s presence (see, e.g., Isa 52:7-8; Ezek 43:1-9).<\/p>\n<p>The prophet Zechariah placed a strong emphasis on this theme of the Lord returning to his people. He was certain that God would once again live among them and that the glory of the Lord would rest in Jerusalem (1:16; 2:5, 10-11; 8:3, 23). God’s presence would return with the rebuilding of the Temple, and Israel would experience spiritual restoration and renewed agricultural bounty (1:17; 4:8-9; 6:15; see also Hag 2:19). In the future, God’s presence would rescue Jerusalem and the people of Israel from enemy nations. The Lord would be enthroned as King over all the earth, and the whole earth would worship the one true God (Zech 9:16; 10:6; 12:9; 14:9). In both the present and the future, the return of the Lord’s presence to Jerusalem was connected with the enabling work of God’s Spirit (4:6; 12:10; see also Hag 2:5).<\/p>\n<p>Zechariah’s promise of the Lord’s presence in Jerusalem anticipated the coming of Jesus the Messiah and the awesome mystery of the Word of God becoming human and living on earth among us (John 1:14).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 26:3; 31:3; Exod 3:12; Deut 31:23; Josh 1:5; Judg 6:16; Isa 7:14; 43:2; 52:8; Ezek 37:27; Joel 3:21; Hag 2:5; Zech 1:16-17; 2:5, 10-11; 4:6; 8:3, 23; 14:9; John 1:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Return of God’s Presence with His People<\/h3>\n<p>The descriptions of the Exile include the tragedy that, as part of his judgment, God withdrew his presence from his people and from the holy city of Jerusalem. This notion is perhaps most clearly demonstrated in a vision of the prophet Ezekiel, who saw a visual depiction of God’s glorious presence leaving the Temple (Ezek 10:1-22; 11:22-23). As such, when the prophets discussed the future restoration of God’s people and their return to the land, they also often spoke of the return of God’s presence (see, e.g., Isa 52:7-8; Ezek 43:1-9).<\/p>\n<p>The prophet Zechariah placed a strong emphasis on this theme of the Lord returning to his people. He was certain that God would once again live among them and that the glory of the Lord would rest in Jerusalem (1:16; 2:5, 10-11; 8:3, 23). God’s presence would return with the rebuilding of the Temple, and Israel would experience spiritual restoration and renewed agricultural bounty (1:17; 4:8-9; 6:15; see also Hag 2:19). In the future, God’s presence would rescue Jerusalem and the people of Israel from enemy nations. The Lord would be enthroned as King over all the earth, and the whole earth would worship the one true God (Zech 9:16; 10:6; 12:9; 14:9). In both the present and the future, the return of the Lord’s presence to Jerusalem was connected with the enabling work of God’s Spirit (4:6; 12:10; see also Hag 2:5).<\/p>\n<p>Zechariah’s promise of the Lord’s presence in Jerusalem anticipated the coming of Jesus the Messiah and the awesome mystery of the Word of God becoming human and living on earth among us (John 1:14).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 26:3; 31:3; Exod 3:12; Deut 31:23; Josh 1:5; Judg 6:16; Isa 7:14; 43:2; 52:8; Ezek 37:27; Joel 3:21; Hag 2:5; Zech 1:16-17; 2:5, 10-11; 4:6; 8:3, 23; 14:9; John 1:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Return of God’s Presence with His People The descriptions of the Exile include the tragedy that, as part of his judgment, God withdrew his presence from his people and from the holy city of Jerusalem. This notion is perhaps most clearly demonstrated in a vision of the prophet Ezekiel, who saw a visual depiction of God’s glorious presence leaving the Temple (Ezek 10:1-22; 11:22-23). As such, when the prophets discussed the future restoration of God’s people and their return to the land, th...","summary_en":"The Return of God’s Presence with His People The descriptions of the Exile include the tragedy that, as part of his judgment, God withdrew his presence from his people and from the holy city of Jerusalem. This notion is perhaps most clearly demonstrated in a vision of the prophet Ezekiel, who saw a visual depiction of God’s glorious presence leaving the Temple (Ezek 10:1-22; 11:22-23). As such, when the prophets discussed the future restoration of God’s people and their return to the land, th...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93431,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Word","title_en":"The Word","content_ro":"<h3>The Word<\/h3>\n<p>John raises the curtain on his Gospel with a stunning description of Jesus Christ as “the Word” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span><em>,<\/em> John 1:1). Both Greek and Jewish listeners in the first century would immediately recognize the profound meaning of this title. Greeks would have thought of the seminal forces that sustain the universe. Jewish minds would have thought back to God creating the world with his word (Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9). In Jesus’ day, the Word of God had taken on creative personal attributes. Jews viewed God’s Word as personifying divine Wisdom. Through Wisdom, God extended himself into the cosmos, creating the world (Prov 8:22-31).<\/p>\n<p>John makes it clear that Jesus shares the same essence as God; the Son existed before time, and he was the agent of all creation. John anchors the divinity of Jesus in this ancient Jewish concept of Wisdom. The divine Wisdom that has existed with God from before time can now be known in Jesus Christ. In perhaps the most striking verse penned by an apostle, John writes that this Logos, this Wisdom, became flesh and lived among us as a human (John 1:14). What God is, the Logos is, and the Logos is Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9; Prov 8:22-31; Isa 40:8; John 1:1-18; 1 Jn 1:1; Rev 19:13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Word<\/h3>\n<p>John raises the curtain on his Gospel with a stunning description of Jesus Christ as “the Word” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span><em>,<\/em> John 1:1). Both Greek and Jewish listeners in the first century would immediately recognize the profound meaning of this title. Greeks would have thought of the seminal forces that sustain the universe. Jewish minds would have thought back to God creating the world with his word (Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9). In Jesus’ day, the Word of God had taken on creative personal attributes. Jews viewed God’s Word as personifying divine Wisdom. Through Wisdom, God extended himself into the cosmos, creating the world (Prov 8:22-31).<\/p>\n<p>John makes it clear that Jesus shares the same essence as God; the Son existed before time, and he was the agent of all creation. John anchors the divinity of Jesus in this ancient Jewish concept of Wisdom. The divine Wisdom that has existed with God from before time can now be known in Jesus Christ. In perhaps the most striking verse penned by an apostle, John writes that this Logos, this Wisdom, became flesh and lived among us as a human (John 1:14). What God is, the Logos is, and the Logos is Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9; Prov 8:22-31; Isa 40:8; John 1:1-18; 1 Jn 1:1; Rev 19:13<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Word John raises the curtain on his Gospel with a stunning description of Jesus Christ as “the Word” (Greek logos, John 1:1). Both Greek and Jewish listeners in the first century would immediately recognize the profound meaning of this title. Greeks would have thought of the seminal forces that sustain the universe. Jewish minds would have thought back to God creating the world with his word (Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9). In Jesus’ day, the Word of God had taken on creative personal attributes...","summary_en":"The Word John raises the curtain on his Gospel with a stunning description of Jesus Christ as “the Word” (Greek logos, John 1:1). Both Greek and Jewish listeners in the first century would immediately recognize the profound meaning of this title. Greeks would have thought of the seminal forces that sustain the universe. Jewish minds would have thought back to God creating the world with his word (Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9). In Jesus’ day, the Word of God had taken on creative personal attributes...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":94004,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miracles","title_en":"Miracles","content_ro":"<h3>Miracles<\/h3>\n<p>Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in more than the miracle itself (see John 12:37). Miracles remind us of the truth that anything is possible for God (Mark 9:21-23; cp. Matt 19:26; Mark 10:27; Luke 1:37; 18:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus performed many miracles during his ministry including physical healings, exorcisms, nature miracles, and raising the dead. Jesus demonstrated a deep love for humankind in the way he responded to people’s needs, and many people followed him in response to his miracles (John 6:2), though he cautioned against following him just because of the miracles (John 6:26). Perhaps the three greatest miracles that occurred in relation to Jesus are (1) his coming as the Word of God in human flesh (John 1:14), (2) his glorious resurrection from the dead (Matt 28; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-53; John 20:1-31; Acts 1:3; 1 Cor 15:3-8; cp Acts 23:6; 26:8), and (3) the miracle of the new birth (John 3:3-8; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:8-10). The coming of Jesus into the world to be the Savior and to die for our sins shows us how much God loves us (John 3:16; Rom 5:8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5; 1 Jn 3:1-2). The fact that God raised Jesus from the dead reveals God’s power over death and gives us a living hope, the promise of eternal life (1 Pet 1:3-9). And the person who puts faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord is born anew as a child of God and receives eternal life (John 1:12; 3:36; Rom 5:1-2; 1 Jn 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>The miraculous activity of Jesus continued in the work of his followers, as demonstrated throughout the book of Acts (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-15; 6:8; 8:6-7; 9:32-42; 14:3). Filled with the Holy Spirit, the apostles and other Christian leaders performed these miraculous signs, wonders, and mighty works, often in order to offer tangible evidence of the power and truth of the Christian message (14:3; see John 3:2; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 19:23-26; 28:1-20; Mark 10:23-27; Luke 1:30-38; 18:24-27; 24:1-53; John 1:12-14; 3:2-8, 16; 20:1–21:25; Acts 4:29-31; 5:12-16; 6:8; 8:4-23; 9:32-42; 14:3-4; 26:8; Rom 5:1, 8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5, 8-10; Heb 2:4; 1 Pet 1:3-5; 1 Jn 5:12-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miracles<\/h3>\n<p>Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in more than the miracle itself (see John 12:37). Miracles remind us of the truth that anything is possible for God (Mark 9:21-23; cp. Matt 19:26; Mark 10:27; Luke 1:37; 18:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus performed many miracles during his ministry including physical healings, exorcisms, nature miracles, and raising the dead. Jesus demonstrated a deep love for humankind in the way he responded to people’s needs, and many people followed him in response to his miracles (John 6:2), though he cautioned against following him just because of the miracles (John 6:26). Perhaps the three greatest miracles that occurred in relation to Jesus are (1) his coming as the Word of God in human flesh (John 1:14), (2) his glorious resurrection from the dead (Matt 28; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-53; John 20:1-31; Acts 1:3; 1 Cor 15:3-8; cp Acts 23:6; 26:8), and (3) the miracle of the new birth (John 3:3-8; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:8-10). The coming of Jesus into the world to be the Savior and to die for our sins shows us how much God loves us (John 3:16; Rom 5:8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5; 1 Jn 3:1-2). The fact that God raised Jesus from the dead reveals God’s power over death and gives us a living hope, the promise of eternal life (1 Pet 1:3-9). And the person who puts faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord is born anew as a child of God and receives eternal life (John 1:12; 3:36; Rom 5:1-2; 1 Jn 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>The miraculous activity of Jesus continued in the work of his followers, as demonstrated throughout the book of Acts (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-15; 6:8; 8:6-7; 9:32-42; 14:3). Filled with the Holy Spirit, the apostles and other Christian leaders performed these miraculous signs, wonders, and mighty works, often in order to offer tangible evidence of the power and truth of the Christian message (14:3; see John 3:2; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 19:23-26; 28:1-20; Mark 10:23-27; Luke 1:30-38; 18:24-27; 24:1-53; John 1:12-14; 3:2-8, 16; 20:1–21:25; Acts 4:29-31; 5:12-16; 6:8; 8:4-23; 9:32-42; 14:3-4; 26:8; Rom 5:1, 8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5, 8-10; Heb 2:4; 1 Pet 1:3-5; 1 Jn 5:12-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miracles Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in ...","summary_en":"Miracles Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":94163,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Grace of God","title_en":"The Grace of God","content_ro":"<h3>The Grace of God<\/h3>\n<p><em>Grace<\/em> is a key word in the Bible. It is used to indicate God’s kindness and favor, often in terms of salvation to the undeserving. The New Testament stresses that grace came through Jesus Christ (John 1:14-17). This is not to say that God’s grace was not active in the Old Testament; rather, God’s gracious activity toward humanity reached its culmination through his Son.<\/p>\n<p>According to the book of Acts, God’s great favor was initially experienced in the Jewish community (see Acts 11:19-21; 13:43-49); later, it became clear that God’s grace in Jesus Christ extends to Gentiles as well (Acts 15:8-9; Eph 2:11-18; Titus 2:11). Signs and wonders attested the reality of God’s grace at work among the Gentiles (Acts 14:3).<\/p>\n<p>Paul proclaimed the Good News “about the wonderful grace of God” (Acts 20:24). Paul never seeks to prove that God is gracious, but he assumes it as a fact when he presents the Good News (see, e.g., Rom 3:24; 5:15-21). Paul rules out any idea that we merit our salvation, because God acts solely by his grace (Rom 4:4-5; Eph 2:4-9). Our good works do not give us right standing with God—if they did, God would be obliged to reward us for our efforts, just as a worker earns a wage (see Rom 11:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>God’s grace continues to impact believers throughout their lives—not just in the moment of conversion. Second Peter closes with a command for Christians to “grow in the grace” of Jesus Christ (2 Pet 3:18). Paul encouraged Christians to “continue to rely on the grace of God” as they remained faithful to their Lord (Acts 13:43). And when Paul left the Ephesian elders, he commended them “to God and the message of his grace,” the divine message that was able to build them up and sustain them (Acts 20:32; see 15:40). God’s grace is at the core of the Christian message and the Christian experience, from beginning to end. It is no wonder that the theme of grace is so prevalent in the writings of Jesus’ early followers.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 34:5-7; Num 6:22-27; Ezra 9:8; Pss 30:5; 31:16; Ps 84:11; Isa 60:10; 61:1-3; Hos 14:1-9; Luke 4:18-19; Acts 15:11; 20:24; Rom 5:15-17, 20-21; 12:6; 2 Cor 6:1; 8:9; 12:9; Gal 2:21; 4:10; 5:3-6; Eph 1:3-8; 2:4-10; 2 Tim 1:9; 2:1; Titus 2:11; 3:7; Heb 2:9; 4:16; 13:9; Jas 4:6; 1 Pet 5:5-6, 12; 2 Pet 3:17-18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Grace of God<\/h3>\n<p><em>Grace<\/em> is a key word in the Bible. It is used to indicate God’s kindness and favor, often in terms of salvation to the undeserving. The New Testament stresses that grace came through Jesus Christ (John 1:14-17). This is not to say that God’s grace was not active in the Old Testament; rather, God’s gracious activity toward humanity reached its culmination through his Son.<\/p>\n<p>According to the book of Acts, God’s great favor was initially experienced in the Jewish community (see Acts 11:19-21; 13:43-49); later, it became clear that God’s grace in Jesus Christ extends to Gentiles as well (Acts 15:8-9; Eph 2:11-18; Titus 2:11). Signs and wonders attested the reality of God’s grace at work among the Gentiles (Acts 14:3).<\/p>\n<p>Paul proclaimed the Good News “about the wonderful grace of God” (Acts 20:24). Paul never seeks to prove that God is gracious, but he assumes it as a fact when he presents the Good News (see, e.g., Rom 3:24; 5:15-21). Paul rules out any idea that we merit our salvation, because God acts solely by his grace (Rom 4:4-5; Eph 2:4-9). Our good works do not give us right standing with God—if they did, God would be obliged to reward us for our efforts, just as a worker earns a wage (see Rom 11:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>God’s grace continues to impact believers throughout their lives—not just in the moment of conversion. Second Peter closes with a command for Christians to “grow in the grace” of Jesus Christ (2 Pet 3:18). Paul encouraged Christians to “continue to rely on the grace of God” as they remained faithful to their Lord (Acts 13:43). And when Paul left the Ephesian elders, he commended them “to God and the message of his grace,” the divine message that was able to build them up and sustain them (Acts 20:32; see 15:40). God’s grace is at the core of the Christian message and the Christian experience, from beginning to end. It is no wonder that the theme of grace is so prevalent in the writings of Jesus’ early followers.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 34:5-7; Num 6:22-27; Ezra 9:8; Pss 30:5; 31:16; Ps 84:11; Isa 60:10; 61:1-3; Hos 14:1-9; Luke 4:18-19; Acts 15:11; 20:24; Rom 5:15-17, 20-21; 12:6; 2 Cor 6:1; 8:9; 12:9; Gal 2:21; 4:10; 5:3-6; Eph 1:3-8; 2:4-10; 2 Tim 1:9; 2:1; Titus 2:11; 3:7; Heb 2:9; 4:16; 13:9; Jas 4:6; 1 Pet 5:5-6, 12; 2 Pet 3:17-18<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Grace of God Grace is a key word in the Bible. It is used to indicate God’s kindness and favor, often in terms of salvation to the undeserving. The New Testament stresses that grace came through Jesus Christ (John 1:14-17). This is not to say that God’s grace was not active in the Old Testament; rather, God’s gracious activity toward humanity reached its culmination through his Son. According to the book of Acts, God’s great favor was initially experienced in the Jewish community (see Act...","summary_en":"The Grace of God Grace is a key word in the Bible. It is used to indicate God’s kindness and favor, often in terms of salvation to the undeserving. The New Testament stresses that grace came through Jesus Christ (John 1:14-17). This is not to say that God’s grace was not active in the Old Testament; rather, God’s gracious activity toward humanity reached its culmination through his Son. According to the book of Acts, God’s great favor was initially experienced in the Jewish community (see Act...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":94823,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Church as God’s Temple","title_en":"The Church as God’s Temple","content_ro":"<h3>The Church as God’s Temple<\/h3>\n<p>The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 <span>BC<\/span> but was destroyed in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7; Ezek 40–43).<\/p>\n<p>While the Temple in Jerusalem was rebuilt after the Exile—and reached a pinnacle during the renovations of Herod the Great—the hopes of God’s people were ultimately fulfilled in the coming of Jesus (see John 1:14; 2:19-22; 4:21-24). He himself is God’s temple, the place where God’s holiness resides, and he calls his people to join him. Thus, God’s people are to be a holy temple of God, a dwelling place for the Holy Spirit (see 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; 1 Pet 2:5; Rev 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>Paul called on believers to realize their identity as God’s “holy people” (2 Cor 1:1) in two ways: They were to separate themselves from moral evil, and they were to be dedicated to God in holy living and service. Christians are therefore urged, “Let us cleanse ourselves from everything that can defile our body or spirit. And let us work toward complete holiness because we fear God” (2 Cor 7:1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 8:12-53; 2 Chr 6:20; Pss 11:4; 27:4-6; Zech 6:12-15; Matt 18:20; John 2:18-22; 14:20; 17:23; Rom 8:10; 1 Cor 3:10-17; 6:18-20; 9:11-14; 2 Cor 6:14–7:1; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:20-22; 3:17-19; Col 1:27; Heb 3:6; 12:18-24; 1 Pet 2:4-9; Rev 1:12-16; 3:12, 20; 21:22<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Church as God’s Temple<\/h3>\n<p>The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 <span>BC<\/span> but was destroyed in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7; Ezek 40–43).<\/p>\n<p>While the Temple in Jerusalem was rebuilt after the Exile—and reached a pinnacle during the renovations of Herod the Great—the hopes of God’s people were ultimately fulfilled in the coming of Jesus (see John 1:14; 2:19-22; 4:21-24). He himself is God’s temple, the place where God’s holiness resides, and he calls his people to join him. Thus, God’s people are to be a holy temple of God, a dwelling place for the Holy Spirit (see 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; 1 Pet 2:5; Rev 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>Paul called on believers to realize their identity as God’s “holy people” (2 Cor 1:1) in two ways: They were to separate themselves from moral evil, and they were to be dedicated to God in holy living and service. Christians are therefore urged, “Let us cleanse ourselves from everything that can defile our body or spirit. And let us work toward complete holiness because we fear God” (2 Cor 7:1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 8:12-53; 2 Chr 6:20; Pss 11:4; 27:4-6; Zech 6:12-15; Matt 18:20; John 2:18-22; 14:20; 17:23; Rom 8:10; 1 Cor 3:10-17; 6:18-20; 9:11-14; 2 Cor 6:14–7:1; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:20-22; 3:17-19; Col 1:27; Heb 3:6; 12:18-24; 1 Pet 2:4-9; Rev 1:12-16; 3:12, 20; 21:22<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Church as God’s Temple The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 BC but was destroyed in 586 BC. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7;...","summary_en":"The Church as God’s Temple The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 BC but was destroyed in 586 BC. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7;...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":95454,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The New Community","title_en":"The New Community","content_ro":"<h3>The New Community<\/h3>\n<p>The New Testament draws attention to the importance of the Christian community, an emphasis that sometimes gets lost in individualistic cultures. Though believers in Christ are individually converted and born again to a new life (John 3:3; 1 Pet 1:23), we are not intended to remain in isolation. God’s purpose is to build us together as “living stones” in his “spiritual temple” (1 Pet 2:5). God no longer inhabits a building on Mount Zion in Jerusalem; he now lives in and among his people by the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>The promise that God would rebuild his temple (see Ezek 40–48) has been fulfilled as God dwells among his people (see John 1:14), who themselves constitute the “temple” under the new covenant. Only as we join together in worship, praise, and service will we function in the way God intended. Christians enjoy together the wonderful blessing of being the people God has chosen to carry out his mission to the world.<\/p>\n<p>As 1 Peter 2:9 makes clear, the church is now what Israel was originally, a “chosen people” (see Deut 7:6), “royal priests,” “a holy nation” (see Exod 19:6), and God’s “very own possession” (see Exod 19:5). With that privileged status comes the responsibility to proclaim God to the nations. As we join in harmonious worship and together serve in various ministries, we “show others the goodness of God” (1 Pet 2:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:3; Exod 19:4-6; Deut 7:6; 2 Chr 5:13-14; Isa 11:1-16; John 1:14; 1 Cor 3:9-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16-18; Eph 2:19-22; 1 Pet 2:4-10; Rev 3:12; 21:1-3, 22<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The New Community<\/h3>\n<p>The New Testament draws attention to the importance of the Christian community, an emphasis that sometimes gets lost in individualistic cultures. Though believers in Christ are individually converted and born again to a new life (John 3:3; 1 Pet 1:23), we are not intended to remain in isolation. God’s purpose is to build us together as “living stones” in his “spiritual temple” (1 Pet 2:5). God no longer inhabits a building on Mount Zion in Jerusalem; he now lives in and among his people by the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>The promise that God would rebuild his temple (see Ezek 40–48) has been fulfilled as God dwells among his people (see John 1:14), who themselves constitute the “temple” under the new covenant. Only as we join together in worship, praise, and service will we function in the way God intended. Christians enjoy together the wonderful blessing of being the people God has chosen to carry out his mission to the world.<\/p>\n<p>As 1 Peter 2:9 makes clear, the church is now what Israel was originally, a “chosen people” (see Deut 7:6), “royal priests,” “a holy nation” (see Exod 19:6), and God’s “very own possession” (see Exod 19:5). With that privileged status comes the responsibility to proclaim God to the nations. As we join in harmonious worship and together serve in various ministries, we “show others the goodness of God” (1 Pet 2:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:3; Exod 19:4-6; Deut 7:6; 2 Chr 5:13-14; Isa 11:1-16; John 1:14; 1 Cor 3:9-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16-18; Eph 2:19-22; 1 Pet 2:4-10; Rev 3:12; 21:1-3, 22<\/p>","summary_ro":"The New Community The New Testament draws attention to the importance of the Christian community, an emphasis that sometimes gets lost in individualistic cultures. Though believers in Christ are individually converted and born again to a new life (John 3:3; 1 Pet 1:23), we are not intended to remain in isolation. God’s purpose is to build us together as “living stones” in his “spiritual temple” (1 Pet 2:5). God no longer inhabits a building on Mount Zion in Jerusalem; he now lives in and amon...","summary_en":"The New Community The New Testament draws attention to the importance of the Christian community, an emphasis that sometimes gets lost in individualistic cultures. Though believers in Christ are individually converted and born again to a new life (John 3:3; 1 Pet 1:23), we are not intended to remain in isolation. God’s purpose is to build us together as “living stones” in his “spiritual temple” (1 Pet 2:5). God no longer inhabits a building on Mount Zion in Jerusalem; he now lives in and amon...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115978,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Cloud and Fire","title_en":"The Cloud and Fire","content_ro":"<h3>The Cloud and Fire<\/h3>\n<p>When Israel was in the wilderness, God led the nation with a pillar of cloud and fire. The pillar joined the Israelites right after the first Passover, immediately after Israel left Egypt (Exod 13:20-22).<\/p>\n<p>The pillar served a variety of functions. When the Egyptians pursued the Israelites, the cloud moved behind the people of Israel and prevented an Egyptian advance (Exod 14:19-20). Through the rest of Israel’s travels, it was a visible indication that “the <span>Lord<\/span> went ahead of them” (Exod 13:21). When the pillar settled over the Tabernacle and the camp of Israel, it represented the Lord’s presence and protection. The cloud and fire also provided divine guidance by indicating when the Israelites should move (Exod 40:36-38; Num 9:17-23). When the pillar was stationary, Israel stayed where they were. When it lifted and moved on, the Israelites broke camp and followed. They camped in different places for varying amounts of time, sometimes briefly and sometimes for a longer period. Israel thus “camped or traveled at the <span>Lord<\/span>’s command” (Num 9:23). The pillar of cloud and fire was like a divine banner flying over the tribes on the march (cp. 10:14, 18, 22, 25).<\/p>\n<p>The pillar regularly appeared as a cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night (9:15-16; Exod 13:21). In the Bible, both fire and clouds often indicate the presence and glory of God (e.g., Exod 19:16-18; 24:15-18; Matt 17:5; 24:30; Acts 1:9; cp. Ps 18:8-13). The cloud and fire imagery indicated that God’s presence and glory moved with Israel through the wilderness. This special manifestation of God (a <em>theophany<\/em>) stayed with them “throughout all their journeys” while they were in the wilderness (Exod 40:38; see also Exod 13:22). Sometimes, “the cloud covered the Tabernacle, and the glory of the <span>Lord<\/span> filled the Tabernacle,” so that “Moses could no longer enter the Tabernacle” (Exod 40:34-35). On other occasions, the cloud descended and hovered near the entrance to the Tent of Meeting, indicating that the Lord was speaking with Moses “face to face” (Exod 33:7-11; cp. Num 11:25; 12:5; Deut 31:15). The pillar of cloud and fire was a constant, reassuring reminder of the Lord’s presence. We are not given any specific description of the fire and the cloud other than that it was shaped like a pillar; regardless, it was a powerful symbol of God’s special care for Israel (see Neh 9:19-21; cp. Pss 46:1; 139; John 1:14; Rom 8:31-39).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 13:20-22; 14:19-24; 16:10; 19:16-18; 24:15-18; 33:7-11; 40:34-38; Lev 16:2; Num 9:15-23; 10:11-12, 34; 11:25; 12:5, 10; 14:14; 16:42; Deut 31:15; 1 Kgs 8:11; 2 Chr 5:14; Neh 9:19-21; Pss 78:14; 99:7; 104:3; Ezek 1:4-5; 10:3; Matt 17:5; 24:30; 26:64; Luke 9:34-35; Acts 1:9; 1 Cor 10:2; 1 Thes 4:17; Rev 1:7; 14:14-16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Cloud and Fire<\/h3>\n<p>When Israel was in the wilderness, God led the nation with a pillar of cloud and fire. The pillar joined the Israelites right after the first Passover, immediately after Israel left Egypt (Exod 13:20-22).<\/p>\n<p>The pillar served a variety of functions. When the Egyptians pursued the Israelites, the cloud moved behind the people of Israel and prevented an Egyptian advance (Exod 14:19-20). Through the rest of Israel’s travels, it was a visible indication that “the <span>Lord<\/span> went ahead of them” (Exod 13:21). When the pillar settled over the Tabernacle and the camp of Israel, it represented the Lord’s presence and protection. The cloud and fire also provided divine guidance by indicating when the Israelites should move (Exod 40:36-38; Num 9:17-23). When the pillar was stationary, Israel stayed where they were. When it lifted and moved on, the Israelites broke camp and followed. They camped in different places for varying amounts of time, sometimes briefly and sometimes for a longer period. Israel thus “camped or traveled at the <span>Lord<\/span>’s command” (Num 9:23). The pillar of cloud and fire was like a divine banner flying over the tribes on the march (cp. 10:14, 18, 22, 25).<\/p>\n<p>The pillar regularly appeared as a cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night (9:15-16; Exod 13:21). In the Bible, both fire and clouds often indicate the presence and glory of God (e.g., Exod 19:16-18; 24:15-18; Matt 17:5; 24:30; Acts 1:9; cp. Ps 18:8-13). The cloud and fire imagery indicated that God’s presence and glory moved with Israel through the wilderness. This special manifestation of God (a <em>theophany<\/em>) stayed with them “throughout all their journeys” while they were in the wilderness (Exod 40:38; see also Exod 13:22). Sometimes, “the cloud covered the Tabernacle, and the glory of the <span>Lord<\/span> filled the Tabernacle,” so that “Moses could no longer enter the Tabernacle” (Exod 40:34-35). On other occasions, the cloud descended and hovered near the entrance to the Tent of Meeting, indicating that the Lord was speaking with Moses “face to face” (Exod 33:7-11; cp. Num 11:25; 12:5; Deut 31:15). The pillar of cloud and fire was a constant, reassuring reminder of the Lord’s presence. We are not given any specific description of the fire and the cloud other than that it was shaped like a pillar; regardless, it was a powerful symbol of God’s special care for Israel (see Neh 9:19-21; cp. Pss 46:1; 139; John 1:14; Rom 8:31-39).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 13:20-22; 14:19-24; 16:10; 19:16-18; 24:15-18; 33:7-11; 40:34-38; Lev 16:2; Num 9:15-23; 10:11-12, 34; 11:25; 12:5, 10; 14:14; 16:42; Deut 31:15; 1 Kgs 8:11; 2 Chr 5:14; Neh 9:19-21; Pss 78:14; 99:7; 104:3; Ezek 1:4-5; 10:3; Matt 17:5; 24:30; 26:64; Luke 9:34-35; Acts 1:9; 1 Cor 10:2; 1 Thes 4:17; Rev 1:7; 14:14-16<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Cloud and Fire When Israel was in the wilderness, God led the nation with a pillar of cloud and fire. The pillar joined the Israelites right after the first Passover, immediately after Israel left Egypt (Exod 13:20-22). The pillar served a variety of functions. When the Egyptians pursued the Israelites, the cloud moved behind the people of Israel and prevented an Egyptian advance (Exod 14:19-20). Through the rest of Israel’s travels, it was a visible indication that “the Lord went ahead o...","summary_en":"The Cloud and Fire When Israel was in the wilderness, God led the nation with a pillar of cloud and fire. The pillar joined the Israelites right after the first Passover, immediately after Israel left Egypt (Exod 13:20-22). The pillar served a variety of functions. When the Egyptians pursued the Israelites, the cloud moved behind the people of Israel and prevented an Egyptian advance (Exod 14:19-20). Through the rest of Israel’s travels, it was a visible indication that “the Lord went ahead o...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":116035,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Central Sanctuary","title_en":"The Central Sanctuary","content_ro":"<h3>The Central Sanctuary<\/h3>\n<p>God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>God is <em>transcendent<\/em> (above all things) and <em>omnipresent<\/em> (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple belonged to him and bore his name, so they were, in a sense, his dwelling places. In the ancient Near East, names were more than labels. They represented the character and nature of the named individuals (e.g., Jacob, Gen 27:36; Jesus, Matt 1:21; Barnabas, Acts 4:36; Peter, Matt 16:17-19). Thus Solomon could advise, “Choose a good reputation [<em>name<\/em>] over great riches” (Prov 22:1).<\/p>\n<p>God made his home in a sanctuary that bore his name. His glorious presence manifested in fire and cloud during the wilderness wanderings served as a constant reminder that he was at home among his people (Exod 40:34-35); likewise, upon the completion of the Temple, his presence was evidenced (1 Kgs 8:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>God would later come to dwell among his people in the person of Jesus Christ (John 1:14), thereby eliminating the need for a central sanctuary (see John 4:19-24). And now, because of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, all believers are able to house God’s presence (1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:8-9, 22, 40; 26:30; 33:7-11; 40:34-35; Num 7:1; 11:16; Deut 12:4-7; 31:14-15; 1 Kgs 8:10-11, 27; John 1:14; 2:19-21; Acts 7:44; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; Heb 8:2, 5; Rev 21:22<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Central Sanctuary<\/h3>\n<p>God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>God is <em>transcendent<\/em> (above all things) and <em>omnipresent<\/em> (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple belonged to him and bore his name, so they were, in a sense, his dwelling places. In the ancient Near East, names were more than labels. They represented the character and nature of the named individuals (e.g., Jacob, Gen 27:36; Jesus, Matt 1:21; Barnabas, Acts 4:36; Peter, Matt 16:17-19). Thus Solomon could advise, “Choose a good reputation [<em>name<\/em>] over great riches” (Prov 22:1).<\/p>\n<p>God made his home in a sanctuary that bore his name. His glorious presence manifested in fire and cloud during the wilderness wanderings served as a constant reminder that he was at home among his people (Exod 40:34-35); likewise, upon the completion of the Temple, his presence was evidenced (1 Kgs 8:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>God would later come to dwell among his people in the person of Jesus Christ (John 1:14), thereby eliminating the need for a central sanctuary (see John 4:19-24). And now, because of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, all believers are able to house God’s presence (1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:8-9, 22, 40; 26:30; 33:7-11; 40:34-35; Num 7:1; 11:16; Deut 12:4-7; 31:14-15; 1 Kgs 8:10-11, 27; John 1:14; 2:19-21; Acts 7:44; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; Heb 8:2, 5; Rev 21:22<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Central Sanctuary God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem. God is transcendent (above all things) and omnipresent (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple ...","summary_en":"The Central Sanctuary God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem. God is transcendent (above all things) and omnipresent (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":116687,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Jerusalem","title_en":"Jerusalem","content_ro":"<h3>Jerusalem<\/h3>\n<p>Jerusalem was a functioning city as early as four hundred years before the time of David. It was never fully captured during the conquest and the period of the judges (Josh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21), and peaceful relations were evidently established between the autonomous Jebusite enclave and the surrounding Israelites (Judg 19:10-12). So impregnable was Jerusalem that the Old Testament records only three successful invaders: David, Jehoash (2 Kgs 14:11-14), and Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon (2 Kgs 25:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Whatever David’s method of capturing Jerusalem (his use of a water tunnel is debatable—see study note on 5:8), he secured Jerusalem as the political, and eventually spiritual, capital of Israel. Psalm 48 speaks beautifully and powerfully of Jerusalem as a fortress. Its towers, bulwarks, and easily defensible citadels with their rugged terrain could produce a false sense of security, if not idolatry. Psalm 48:1-3 reminds the reader that God’s living presence, not the topography of the city, made Jerusalem safe.<\/p>\n<p>Both the Old Testament and the New Testament call Jerusalem a “holy city” (see Neh 11:1, 18; Isa 52:1; Dan 9:24; Matt 4:5; 27:53; Rev 21:2). It is the only city so described in the Bible. Wherein lies this city’s holiness? It cannot be a reflection of the holiness of its occupants. In fact, so unholy was the populace that the city was decimated by the Babylonians in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. Nor was it a holy city because it was Israel’s capital for several centuries. Jerusalem was a holy city, first of all, because God chose it (1 Kgs 8:44, 48; 11:13, 32, 36; 2 Chr 6:5, 34). And because he chose it, he put his glory and his name there (see 1 Kgs 14:21; 2 Chr 12:13; Ezek 8–10; 43:1-27).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels and Acts, Jerusalem was still a city of great importance. Herod the Great (37–4 <span>BC<\/span>) had expanded the city and conducted extensive building projects—including the Temple. It remained the center of Israel’s spiritual life (see e.g., Acts 2:46; 3:1-26; 5:12), and many events in the lives of Jesus and his followers occurred in Jerusalem. Jesus had some harsh words for Jerusalem (see Matt 23:37-39)—especially its leadership—and he was eventually put to death there. Jesus warned of impending judgment on the city (see Mark 13:1-2; Luke 21:20-24), and his words were actualized in the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans in <span>AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\n<p>But the New Testament also introduces the new Jerusalem, the heavenly city comprised of God’s holy people (Heb 11:10; Rev 3:12; 21:2). As the earthly Jerusalem was the sphere in which the glorious presence and reign of God was partially actualized through King David and his successors, the new Jerusalem represents the government of Jesus Christ, the son of David, and his everlasting presence with his people (cp. John 1:14; Rev 21:3).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Josh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21; 2 Sam 5:6-9; 1 Kgs 8:1; 2 Kgs 18:13-17; 25:1-10; 2 Chr 3:1; 12:1-12; 26:9, 15; 32:1-5, 27-30; Ezra 1:1-6; Neh 1:1–6:19; Ps 48:1-3; 125:2; Isa 14:32; 52:1-3; Gal 4:25-26; Heb 12:22-24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jerusalem<\/h3>\n<p>Jerusalem was a functioning city as early as four hundred years before the time of David. It was never fully captured during the conquest and the period of the judges (Josh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21), and peaceful relations were evidently established between the autonomous Jebusite enclave and the surrounding Israelites (Judg 19:10-12). So impregnable was Jerusalem that the Old Testament records only three successful invaders: David, Jehoash (2 Kgs 14:11-14), and Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon (2 Kgs 25:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Whatever David’s method of capturing Jerusalem (his use of a water tunnel is debatable—see study note on 5:8), he secured Jerusalem as the political, and eventually spiritual, capital of Israel. Psalm 48 speaks beautifully and powerfully of Jerusalem as a fortress. Its towers, bulwarks, and easily defensible citadels with their rugged terrain could produce a false sense of security, if not idolatry. Psalm 48:1-3 reminds the reader that God’s living presence, not the topography of the city, made Jerusalem safe.<\/p>\n<p>Both the Old Testament and the New Testament call Jerusalem a “holy city” (see Neh 11:1, 18; Isa 52:1; Dan 9:24; Matt 4:5; 27:53; Rev 21:2). It is the only city so described in the Bible. Wherein lies this city’s holiness? It cannot be a reflection of the holiness of its occupants. In fact, so unholy was the populace that the city was decimated by the Babylonians in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. Nor was it a holy city because it was Israel’s capital for several centuries. Jerusalem was a holy city, first of all, because God chose it (1 Kgs 8:44, 48; 11:13, 32, 36; 2 Chr 6:5, 34). And because he chose it, he put his glory and his name there (see 1 Kgs 14:21; 2 Chr 12:13; Ezek 8–10; 43:1-27).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels and Acts, Jerusalem was still a city of great importance. Herod the Great (37–4 <span>BC<\/span>) had expanded the city and conducted extensive building projects—including the Temple. It remained the center of Israel’s spiritual life (see e.g., Acts 2:46; 3:1-26; 5:12), and many events in the lives of Jesus and his followers occurred in Jerusalem. Jesus had some harsh words for Jerusalem (see Matt 23:37-39)—especially its leadership—and he was eventually put to death there. Jesus warned of impending judgment on the city (see Mark 13:1-2; Luke 21:20-24), and his words were actualized in the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans in <span>AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\n<p>But the New Testament also introduces the new Jerusalem, the heavenly city comprised of God’s holy people (Heb 11:10; Rev 3:12; 21:2). As the earthly Jerusalem was the sphere in which the glorious presence and reign of God was partially actualized through King David and his successors, the new Jerusalem represents the government of Jesus Christ, the son of David, and his everlasting presence with his people (cp. John 1:14; Rev 21:3).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Josh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21; 2 Sam 5:6-9; 1 Kgs 8:1; 2 Kgs 18:13-17; 25:1-10; 2 Chr 3:1; 12:1-12; 26:9, 15; 32:1-5, 27-30; Ezra 1:1-6; Neh 1:1–6:19; Ps 48:1-3; 125:2; Isa 14:32; 52:1-3; Gal 4:25-26; Heb 12:22-24<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jerusalem Jerusalem was a functioning city as early as four hundred years before the time of David. It was never fully captured during the conquest and the period of the judges (Josh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21), and peaceful relations were evidently established between the autonomous Jebusite enclave and the surrounding Israelites (Judg 19:10-12). So impregnable was Jerusalem that the Old Testament records only three successful invaders: David, Jehoash (2 Kgs 14:11-14), and Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon...","summary_en":"Jerusalem Jerusalem was a functioning city as early as four hundred years before the time of David. It was never fully captured during the conquest and the period of the judges (Josh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21), and peaceful relations were evidently established between the autonomous Jebusite enclave and the surrounding Israelites (Judg 19:10-12). So impregnable was Jerusalem that the Old Testament records only three successful invaders: David, Jehoash (2 Kgs 14:11-14), and Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":119599,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Glory with His People","title_en":"God’s Glory with His People","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Glory with His People<\/h3>\n<p>In ancient Israel, God’s glory was particularly manifest at the central sanctuaries that had been built for him. When the Israelites completed construction of the Tabernacle, that sacred space became filled with the glory of the Lord (Exod 40:34-35). Likewise, after the Temple was completed and the Ark of the Covenant was brought in, God’s glorious presence filled the Temple (1 Kgs 8:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>The presence and absence of God’s glory is a central theme in the book of Ezekiel. God’s glory appears to the prophet Ezekiel while he is exiled in Babylon, meaning that his glory was no longer present at the Temple in Jerusalem. The reason God’s glory had departed from the Temple at that time becomes clear in Ezekiel’s vision in Ezekiel 8–11, in which the prophet sees the abominations that had polluted the Temple in Jerusalem. Without God’s presence, the Temple had become an empty shell awaiting destruction. God was not forcibly evicted by the superior might of the Babylonian army; he voluntarily departed because his people were defiled. Their sin drove him away from the land he had promised to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. For a time, the Lord went from Jerusalem to Babylon to become a sanctuary for the exiles there (see 11:16).<\/p>\n<p>God would not abandon his Temple forever. After pouring out his wrath in full measure, he would restore a remnant to their land and sanctify them by his Spirit so that he could once again dwell in their midst in a new sanctuary (37:26). God’s glory, dwelling among his people forever (43:1-5), is at the heart of Ezekiel’s vision of their restoration.<\/p>\n<p>The glory of God has come to live among us fully in the person of Jesus Christ. As John testifies, “We have seen his glory, the glory of the Father’s one and only Son” (John 1:14). The aged Simeon saw the baby Jesus brought to the Temple and described him as “a light to reveal God to the nations, and . . . the glory of your people Israel” (Luke 2:32). Jesus’ glory was veiled while he was on earth, though for a moment on the Mount of Transfiguration his radiance was revealed to his closest disciples (Matt 17:2). He experienced his own abandonment by God as he hung on the cross, bearing the curse for our sin (Matt 27:46). Now, as the exalted and glorified Lord, he sits at God’s right hand (Eph 1:19-20). By his Spirit, he has promised never to abandon us, but to be with us to the end of time (Matt 28:20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 15:11; 33:18–34:8; 40:34; Ps 19:1-11; Isa 4:5-6; 6:3; 40:5; 42:8; 43:7; 58:8; 60:1-2; Ezek 1:1-28; 11:16; 37:26; 43:1-5; 44:4; Hab 2:14; Matt 17:2; 28:20; Luke 2:32; John 1:14; 2 Cor 4:4-6; Heb 1:3; Rev 21:10-11, 23<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Glory with His People<\/h3>\n<p>In ancient Israel, God’s glory was particularly manifest at the central sanctuaries that had been built for him. When the Israelites completed construction of the Tabernacle, that sacred space became filled with the glory of the Lord (Exod 40:34-35). Likewise, after the Temple was completed and the Ark of the Covenant was brought in, God’s glorious presence filled the Temple (1 Kgs 8:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>The presence and absence of God’s glory is a central theme in the book of Ezekiel. God’s glory appears to the prophet Ezekiel while he is exiled in Babylon, meaning that his glory was no longer present at the Temple in Jerusalem. The reason God’s glory had departed from the Temple at that time becomes clear in Ezekiel’s vision in Ezekiel 8–11, in which the prophet sees the abominations that had polluted the Temple in Jerusalem. Without God’s presence, the Temple had become an empty shell awaiting destruction. God was not forcibly evicted by the superior might of the Babylonian army; he voluntarily departed because his people were defiled. Their sin drove him away from the land he had promised to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. For a time, the Lord went from Jerusalem to Babylon to become a sanctuary for the exiles there (see 11:16).<\/p>\n<p>God would not abandon his Temple forever. After pouring out his wrath in full measure, he would restore a remnant to their land and sanctify them by his Spirit so that he could once again dwell in their midst in a new sanctuary (37:26). God’s glory, dwelling among his people forever (43:1-5), is at the heart of Ezekiel’s vision of their restoration.<\/p>\n<p>The glory of God has come to live among us fully in the person of Jesus Christ. As John testifies, “We have seen his glory, the glory of the Father’s one and only Son” (John 1:14). The aged Simeon saw the baby Jesus brought to the Temple and described him as “a light to reveal God to the nations, and . . . the glory of your people Israel” (Luke 2:32). Jesus’ glory was veiled while he was on earth, though for a moment on the Mount of Transfiguration his radiance was revealed to his closest disciples (Matt 17:2). He experienced his own abandonment by God as he hung on the cross, bearing the curse for our sin (Matt 27:46). Now, as the exalted and glorified Lord, he sits at God’s right hand (Eph 1:19-20). By his Spirit, he has promised never to abandon us, but to be with us to the end of time (Matt 28:20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 15:11; 33:18–34:8; 40:34; Ps 19:1-11; Isa 4:5-6; 6:3; 40:5; 42:8; 43:7; 58:8; 60:1-2; Ezek 1:1-28; 11:16; 37:26; 43:1-5; 44:4; Hab 2:14; Matt 17:2; 28:20; Luke 2:32; John 1:14; 2 Cor 4:4-6; Heb 1:3; Rev 21:10-11, 23<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Glory with His People In ancient Israel, God’s glory was particularly manifest at the central sanctuaries that had been built for him. When the Israelites completed construction of the Tabernacle, that sacred space became filled with the glory of the Lord (Exod 40:34-35). Likewise, after the Temple was completed and the Ark of the Covenant was brought in, God’s glorious presence filled the Temple (1 Kgs 8:10-11). The presence and absence of God’s glory is a central theme in the book of ...","summary_en":"God’s Glory with His People In ancient Israel, God’s glory was particularly manifest at the central sanctuaries that had been built for him. When the Israelites completed construction of the Tabernacle, that sacred space became filled with the glory of the Lord (Exod 40:34-35). Likewise, after the Temple was completed and the Ark of the Covenant was brought in, God’s glorious presence filled the Temple (1 Kgs 8:10-11). The presence and absence of God’s glory is a central theme in the book of ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120075,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Return of God’s Presence with His People","title_en":"The Return of God’s Presence with His People","content_ro":"<h3>The Return of God’s Presence with His People<\/h3>\n<p>The descriptions of the Exile include the tragedy that, as part of his judgment, God withdrew his presence from his people and from the holy city of Jerusalem. This notion is perhaps most clearly demonstrated in a vision of the prophet Ezekiel, who saw a visual depiction of God’s glorious presence leaving the Temple (Ezek 10:1-22; 11:22-23). As such, when the prophets discussed the future restoration of God’s people and their return to the land, they also often spoke of the return of God’s presence (see, e.g., Isa 52:7-8; Ezek 43:1-9).<\/p>\n<p>The prophet Zechariah placed a strong emphasis on this theme of the Lord returning to his people. He was certain that God would once again live among them and that the glory of the Lord would rest in Jerusalem (1:16; 2:5, 10-11; 8:3, 23). God’s presence would return with the rebuilding of the Temple, and Israel would experience spiritual restoration and renewed agricultural bounty (1:17; 4:8-9; 6:15; see also Hag 2:19). In the future, God’s presence would rescue Jerusalem and the people of Israel from enemy nations. The Lord would be enthroned as King over all the earth, and the whole earth would worship the one true God (Zech 9:16; 10:6; 12:9; 14:9). In both the present and the future, the return of the Lord’s presence to Jerusalem was connected with the enabling work of God’s Spirit (4:6; 12:10; see also Hag 2:5).<\/p>\n<p>Zechariah’s promise of the Lord’s presence in Jerusalem anticipated the coming of Jesus the Messiah and the awesome mystery of the Word of God becoming human and living on earth among us (John 1:14).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 26:3; 31:3; Exod 3:12; Deut 31:23; Josh 1:5; Judg 6:16; Isa 7:14; 43:2; 52:8; Ezek 37:27; Joel 3:21; Hag 2:5; Zech 1:16-17; 2:5, 10-11; 4:6; 8:3, 23; 14:9; John 1:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Return of God’s Presence with His People<\/h3>\n<p>The descriptions of the Exile include the tragedy that, as part of his judgment, God withdrew his presence from his people and from the holy city of Jerusalem. This notion is perhaps most clearly demonstrated in a vision of the prophet Ezekiel, who saw a visual depiction of God’s glorious presence leaving the Temple (Ezek 10:1-22; 11:22-23). As such, when the prophets discussed the future restoration of God’s people and their return to the land, they also often spoke of the return of God’s presence (see, e.g., Isa 52:7-8; Ezek 43:1-9).<\/p>\n<p>The prophet Zechariah placed a strong emphasis on this theme of the Lord returning to his people. He was certain that God would once again live among them and that the glory of the Lord would rest in Jerusalem (1:16; 2:5, 10-11; 8:3, 23). God’s presence would return with the rebuilding of the Temple, and Israel would experience spiritual restoration and renewed agricultural bounty (1:17; 4:8-9; 6:15; see also Hag 2:19). In the future, God’s presence would rescue Jerusalem and the people of Israel from enemy nations. The Lord would be enthroned as King over all the earth, and the whole earth would worship the one true God (Zech 9:16; 10:6; 12:9; 14:9). In both the present and the future, the return of the Lord’s presence to Jerusalem was connected with the enabling work of God’s Spirit (4:6; 12:10; see also Hag 2:5).<\/p>\n<p>Zechariah’s promise of the Lord’s presence in Jerusalem anticipated the coming of Jesus the Messiah and the awesome mystery of the Word of God becoming human and living on earth among us (John 1:14).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 26:3; 31:3; Exod 3:12; Deut 31:23; Josh 1:5; Judg 6:16; Isa 7:14; 43:2; 52:8; Ezek 37:27; Joel 3:21; Hag 2:5; Zech 1:16-17; 2:5, 10-11; 4:6; 8:3, 23; 14:9; John 1:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Return of God’s Presence with His People The descriptions of the Exile include the tragedy that, as part of his judgment, God withdrew his presence from his people and from the holy city of Jerusalem. This notion is perhaps most clearly demonstrated in a vision of the prophet Ezekiel, who saw a visual depiction of God’s glorious presence leaving the Temple (Ezek 10:1-22; 11:22-23). As such, when the prophets discussed the future restoration of God’s people and their return to the land, th...","summary_en":"The Return of God’s Presence with His People The descriptions of the Exile include the tragedy that, as part of his judgment, God withdrew his presence from his people and from the holy city of Jerusalem. This notion is perhaps most clearly demonstrated in a vision of the prophet Ezekiel, who saw a visual depiction of God’s glorious presence leaving the Temple (Ezek 10:1-22; 11:22-23). As such, when the prophets discussed the future restoration of God’s people and their return to the land, th...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121057,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Word","title_en":"The Word","content_ro":"<h3>The Word<\/h3>\n<p>John raises the curtain on his Gospel with a stunning description of Jesus Christ as “the Word” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span><em>,<\/em> John 1:1). Both Greek and Jewish listeners in the first century would immediately recognize the profound meaning of this title. Greeks would have thought of the seminal forces that sustain the universe. Jewish minds would have thought back to God creating the world with his word (Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9). In Jesus’ day, the Word of God had taken on creative personal attributes. Jews viewed God’s Word as personifying divine Wisdom. Through Wisdom, God extended himself into the cosmos, creating the world (Prov 8:22-31).<\/p>\n<p>John makes it clear that Jesus shares the same essence as God; the Son existed before time, and he was the agent of all creation. John anchors the divinity of Jesus in this ancient Jewish concept of Wisdom. The divine Wisdom that has existed with God from before time can now be known in Jesus Christ. In perhaps the most striking verse penned by an apostle, John writes that this Logos, this Wisdom, became flesh and lived among us as a human (John 1:14). What God is, the Logos is, and the Logos is Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9; Prov 8:22-31; Isa 40:8; John 1:1-18; 1 Jn 1:1; Rev 19:13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Word<\/h3>\n<p>John raises the curtain on his Gospel with a stunning description of Jesus Christ as “the Word” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span><em>,<\/em> John 1:1). Both Greek and Jewish listeners in the first century would immediately recognize the profound meaning of this title. Greeks would have thought of the seminal forces that sustain the universe. Jewish minds would have thought back to God creating the world with his word (Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9). In Jesus’ day, the Word of God had taken on creative personal attributes. Jews viewed God’s Word as personifying divine Wisdom. Through Wisdom, God extended himself into the cosmos, creating the world (Prov 8:22-31).<\/p>\n<p>John makes it clear that Jesus shares the same essence as God; the Son existed before time, and he was the agent of all creation. John anchors the divinity of Jesus in this ancient Jewish concept of Wisdom. The divine Wisdom that has existed with God from before time can now be known in Jesus Christ. In perhaps the most striking verse penned by an apostle, John writes that this Logos, this Wisdom, became flesh and lived among us as a human (John 1:14). What God is, the Logos is, and the Logos is Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9; Prov 8:22-31; Isa 40:8; John 1:1-18; 1 Jn 1:1; Rev 19:13<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Word John raises the curtain on his Gospel with a stunning description of Jesus Christ as “the Word” (Greek logos, John 1:1). Both Greek and Jewish listeners in the first century would immediately recognize the profound meaning of this title. Greeks would have thought of the seminal forces that sustain the universe. Jewish minds would have thought back to God creating the world with his word (Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9). In Jesus’ day, the Word of God had taken on creative personal attributes...","summary_en":"The Word John raises the curtain on his Gospel with a stunning description of Jesus Christ as “the Word” (Greek logos, John 1:1). Both Greek and Jewish listeners in the first century would immediately recognize the profound meaning of this title. Greeks would have thought of the seminal forces that sustain the universe. Jewish minds would have thought back to God creating the world with his word (Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9). In Jesus’ day, the Word of God had taken on creative personal attributes...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121630,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miracles","title_en":"Miracles","content_ro":"<h3>Miracles<\/h3>\n<p>Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in more than the miracle itself (see John 12:37). Miracles remind us of the truth that anything is possible for God (Mark 9:21-23; cp. Matt 19:26; Mark 10:27; Luke 1:37; 18:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus performed many miracles during his ministry including physical healings, exorcisms, nature miracles, and raising the dead. Jesus demonstrated a deep love for humankind in the way he responded to people’s needs, and many people followed him in response to his miracles (John 6:2), though he cautioned against following him just because of the miracles (John 6:26). Perhaps the three greatest miracles that occurred in relation to Jesus are (1) his coming as the Word of God in human flesh (John 1:14), (2) his glorious resurrection from the dead (Matt 28; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-53; John 20:1-31; Acts 1:3; 1 Cor 15:3-8; cp Acts 23:6; 26:8), and (3) the miracle of the new birth (John 3:3-8; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:8-10). The coming of Jesus into the world to be the Savior and to die for our sins shows us how much God loves us (John 3:16; Rom 5:8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5; 1 Jn 3:1-2). The fact that God raised Jesus from the dead reveals God’s power over death and gives us a living hope, the promise of eternal life (1 Pet 1:3-9). And the person who puts faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord is born anew as a child of God and receives eternal life (John 1:12; 3:36; Rom 5:1-2; 1 Jn 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>The miraculous activity of Jesus continued in the work of his followers, as demonstrated throughout the book of Acts (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-15; 6:8; 8:6-7; 9:32-42; 14:3). Filled with the Holy Spirit, the apostles and other Christian leaders performed these miraculous signs, wonders, and mighty works, often in order to offer tangible evidence of the power and truth of the Christian message (14:3; see John 3:2; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 19:23-26; 28:1-20; Mark 10:23-27; Luke 1:30-38; 18:24-27; 24:1-53; John 1:12-14; 3:2-8, 16; 20:1–21:25; Acts 4:29-31; 5:12-16; 6:8; 8:4-23; 9:32-42; 14:3-4; 26:8; Rom 5:1, 8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5, 8-10; Heb 2:4; 1 Pet 1:3-5; 1 Jn 5:12-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miracles<\/h3>\n<p>Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in more than the miracle itself (see John 12:37). Miracles remind us of the truth that anything is possible for God (Mark 9:21-23; cp. Matt 19:26; Mark 10:27; Luke 1:37; 18:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus performed many miracles during his ministry including physical healings, exorcisms, nature miracles, and raising the dead. Jesus demonstrated a deep love for humankind in the way he responded to people’s needs, and many people followed him in response to his miracles (John 6:2), though he cautioned against following him just because of the miracles (John 6:26). Perhaps the three greatest miracles that occurred in relation to Jesus are (1) his coming as the Word of God in human flesh (John 1:14), (2) his glorious resurrection from the dead (Matt 28; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-53; John 20:1-31; Acts 1:3; 1 Cor 15:3-8; cp Acts 23:6; 26:8), and (3) the miracle of the new birth (John 3:3-8; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:8-10). The coming of Jesus into the world to be the Savior and to die for our sins shows us how much God loves us (John 3:16; Rom 5:8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5; 1 Jn 3:1-2). The fact that God raised Jesus from the dead reveals God’s power over death and gives us a living hope, the promise of eternal life (1 Pet 1:3-9). And the person who puts faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord is born anew as a child of God and receives eternal life (John 1:12; 3:36; Rom 5:1-2; 1 Jn 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>The miraculous activity of Jesus continued in the work of his followers, as demonstrated throughout the book of Acts (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-15; 6:8; 8:6-7; 9:32-42; 14:3). Filled with the Holy Spirit, the apostles and other Christian leaders performed these miraculous signs, wonders, and mighty works, often in order to offer tangible evidence of the power and truth of the Christian message (14:3; see John 3:2; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 19:23-26; 28:1-20; Mark 10:23-27; Luke 1:30-38; 18:24-27; 24:1-53; John 1:12-14; 3:2-8, 16; 20:1–21:25; Acts 4:29-31; 5:12-16; 6:8; 8:4-23; 9:32-42; 14:3-4; 26:8; Rom 5:1, 8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5, 8-10; Heb 2:4; 1 Pet 1:3-5; 1 Jn 5:12-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miracles Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in ...","summary_en":"Miracles Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121789,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Grace of God","title_en":"The Grace of God","content_ro":"<h3>The Grace of God<\/h3>\n<p><em>Grace<\/em> is a key word in the Bible. It is used to indicate God’s kindness and favor, often in terms of salvation to the undeserving. The New Testament stresses that grace came through Jesus Christ (John 1:14-17). This is not to say that God’s grace was not active in the Old Testament; rather, God’s gracious activity toward humanity reached its culmination through his Son.<\/p>\n<p>According to the book of Acts, God’s great favor was initially experienced in the Jewish community (see Acts 11:19-21; 13:43-49); later, it became clear that God’s grace in Jesus Christ extends to Gentiles as well (Acts 15:8-9; Eph 2:11-18; Titus 2:11). Signs and wonders attested the reality of God’s grace at work among the Gentiles (Acts 14:3).<\/p>\n<p>Paul proclaimed the Good News “about the wonderful grace of God” (Acts 20:24). Paul never seeks to prove that God is gracious, but he assumes it as a fact when he presents the Good News (see, e.g., Rom 3:24; 5:15-21). Paul rules out any idea that we merit our salvation, because God acts solely by his grace (Rom 4:4-5; Eph 2:4-9). Our good works do not give us right standing with God—if they did, God would be obliged to reward us for our efforts, just as a worker earns a wage (see Rom 11:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>God’s grace continues to impact believers throughout their lives—not just in the moment of conversion. Second Peter closes with a command for Christians to “grow in the grace” of Jesus Christ (2 Pet 3:18). Paul encouraged Christians to “continue to rely on the grace of God” as they remained faithful to their Lord (Acts 13:43). And when Paul left the Ephesian elders, he commended them “to God and the message of his grace,” the divine message that was able to build them up and sustain them (Acts 20:32; see 15:40). God’s grace is at the core of the Christian message and the Christian experience, from beginning to end. It is no wonder that the theme of grace is so prevalent in the writings of Jesus’ early followers.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 34:5-7; Num 6:22-27; Ezra 9:8; Pss 30:5; 31:16; Ps 84:11; Isa 60:10; 61:1-3; Hos 14:1-9; Luke 4:18-19; Acts 15:11; 20:24; Rom 5:15-17, 20-21; 12:6; 2 Cor 6:1; 8:9; 12:9; Gal 2:21; 4:10; 5:3-6; Eph 1:3-8; 2:4-10; 2 Tim 1:9; 2:1; Titus 2:11; 3:7; Heb 2:9; 4:16; 13:9; Jas 4:6; 1 Pet 5:5-6, 12; 2 Pet 3:17-18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Grace of God<\/h3>\n<p><em>Grace<\/em> is a key word in the Bible. It is used to indicate God’s kindness and favor, often in terms of salvation to the undeserving. The New Testament stresses that grace came through Jesus Christ (John 1:14-17). This is not to say that God’s grace was not active in the Old Testament; rather, God’s gracious activity toward humanity reached its culmination through his Son.<\/p>\n<p>According to the book of Acts, God’s great favor was initially experienced in the Jewish community (see Acts 11:19-21; 13:43-49); later, it became clear that God’s grace in Jesus Christ extends to Gentiles as well (Acts 15:8-9; Eph 2:11-18; Titus 2:11). Signs and wonders attested the reality of God’s grace at work among the Gentiles (Acts 14:3).<\/p>\n<p>Paul proclaimed the Good News “about the wonderful grace of God” (Acts 20:24). Paul never seeks to prove that God is gracious, but he assumes it as a fact when he presents the Good News (see, e.g., Rom 3:24; 5:15-21). Paul rules out any idea that we merit our salvation, because God acts solely by his grace (Rom 4:4-5; Eph 2:4-9). Our good works do not give us right standing with God—if they did, God would be obliged to reward us for our efforts, just as a worker earns a wage (see Rom 11:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>God’s grace continues to impact believers throughout their lives—not just in the moment of conversion. Second Peter closes with a command for Christians to “grow in the grace” of Jesus Christ (2 Pet 3:18). Paul encouraged Christians to “continue to rely on the grace of God” as they remained faithful to their Lord (Acts 13:43). And when Paul left the Ephesian elders, he commended them “to God and the message of his grace,” the divine message that was able to build them up and sustain them (Acts 20:32; see 15:40). God’s grace is at the core of the Christian message and the Christian experience, from beginning to end. It is no wonder that the theme of grace is so prevalent in the writings of Jesus’ early followers.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 34:5-7; Num 6:22-27; Ezra 9:8; Pss 30:5; 31:16; Ps 84:11; Isa 60:10; 61:1-3; Hos 14:1-9; Luke 4:18-19; Acts 15:11; 20:24; Rom 5:15-17, 20-21; 12:6; 2 Cor 6:1; 8:9; 12:9; Gal 2:21; 4:10; 5:3-6; Eph 1:3-8; 2:4-10; 2 Tim 1:9; 2:1; Titus 2:11; 3:7; Heb 2:9; 4:16; 13:9; Jas 4:6; 1 Pet 5:5-6, 12; 2 Pet 3:17-18<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Grace of God Grace is a key word in the Bible. It is used to indicate God’s kindness and favor, often in terms of salvation to the undeserving. The New Testament stresses that grace came through Jesus Christ (John 1:14-17). This is not to say that God’s grace was not active in the Old Testament; rather, God’s gracious activity toward humanity reached its culmination through his Son. According to the book of Acts, God’s great favor was initially experienced in the Jewish community (see Act...","summary_en":"The Grace of God Grace is a key word in the Bible. It is used to indicate God’s kindness and favor, often in terms of salvation to the undeserving. The New Testament stresses that grace came through Jesus Christ (John 1:14-17). This is not to say that God’s grace was not active in the Old Testament; rather, God’s gracious activity toward humanity reached its culmination through his Son. According to the book of Acts, God’s great favor was initially experienced in the Jewish community (see Act...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":122449,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Church as God’s Temple","title_en":"The Church as God’s Temple","content_ro":"<h3>The Church as God’s Temple<\/h3>\n<p>The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 <span>BC<\/span> but was destroyed in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7; Ezek 40–43).<\/p>\n<p>While the Temple in Jerusalem was rebuilt after the Exile—and reached a pinnacle during the renovations of Herod the Great—the hopes of God’s people were ultimately fulfilled in the coming of Jesus (see John 1:14; 2:19-22; 4:21-24). He himself is God’s temple, the place where God’s holiness resides, and he calls his people to join him. Thus, God’s people are to be a holy temple of God, a dwelling place for the Holy Spirit (see 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; 1 Pet 2:5; Rev 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>Paul called on believers to realize their identity as God’s “holy people” (2 Cor 1:1) in two ways: They were to separate themselves from moral evil, and they were to be dedicated to God in holy living and service. Christians are therefore urged, “Let us cleanse ourselves from everything that can defile our body or spirit. And let us work toward complete holiness because we fear God” (2 Cor 7:1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 8:12-53; 2 Chr 6:20; Pss 11:4; 27:4-6; Zech 6:12-15; Matt 18:20; John 2:18-22; 14:20; 17:23; Rom 8:10; 1 Cor 3:10-17; 6:18-20; 9:11-14; 2 Cor 6:14–7:1; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:20-22; 3:17-19; Col 1:27; Heb 3:6; 12:18-24; 1 Pet 2:4-9; Rev 1:12-16; 3:12, 20; 21:22<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Church as God’s Temple<\/h3>\n<p>The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 <span>BC<\/span> but was destroyed in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7; Ezek 40–43).<\/p>\n<p>While the Temple in Jerusalem was rebuilt after the Exile—and reached a pinnacle during the renovations of Herod the Great—the hopes of God’s people were ultimately fulfilled in the coming of Jesus (see John 1:14; 2:19-22; 4:21-24). He himself is God’s temple, the place where God’s holiness resides, and he calls his people to join him. Thus, God’s people are to be a holy temple of God, a dwelling place for the Holy Spirit (see 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; 1 Pet 2:5; Rev 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>Paul called on believers to realize their identity as God’s “holy people” (2 Cor 1:1) in two ways: They were to separate themselves from moral evil, and they were to be dedicated to God in holy living and service. Christians are therefore urged, “Let us cleanse ourselves from everything that can defile our body or spirit. And let us work toward complete holiness because we fear God” (2 Cor 7:1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 8:12-53; 2 Chr 6:20; Pss 11:4; 27:4-6; Zech 6:12-15; Matt 18:20; John 2:18-22; 14:20; 17:23; Rom 8:10; 1 Cor 3:10-17; 6:18-20; 9:11-14; 2 Cor 6:14–7:1; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:20-22; 3:17-19; Col 1:27; Heb 3:6; 12:18-24; 1 Pet 2:4-9; Rev 1:12-16; 3:12, 20; 21:22<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Church as God’s Temple The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 BC but was destroyed in 586 BC. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7;...","summary_en":"The Church as God’s Temple The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 BC but was destroyed in 586 BC. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7;...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":123080,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The New Community","title_en":"The New Community","content_ro":"<h3>The New Community<\/h3>\n<p>The New Testament draws attention to the importance of the Christian community, an emphasis that sometimes gets lost in individualistic cultures. Though believers in Christ are individually converted and born again to a new life (John 3:3; 1 Pet 1:23), we are not intended to remain in isolation. God’s purpose is to build us together as “living stones” in his “spiritual temple” (1 Pet 2:5). God no longer inhabits a building on Mount Zion in Jerusalem; he now lives in and among his people by the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>The promise that God would rebuild his temple (see Ezek 40–48) has been fulfilled as God dwells among his people (see John 1:14), who themselves constitute the “temple” under the new covenant. Only as we join together in worship, praise, and service will we function in the way God intended. Christians enjoy together the wonderful blessing of being the people God has chosen to carry out his mission to the world.<\/p>\n<p>As 1 Peter 2:9 makes clear, the church is now what Israel was originally, a “chosen people” (see Deut 7:6), “royal priests,” “a holy nation” (see Exod 19:6), and God’s “very own possession” (see Exod 19:5). With that privileged status comes the responsibility to proclaim God to the nations. As we join in harmonious worship and together serve in various ministries, we “show others the goodness of God” (1 Pet 2:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:3; Exod 19:4-6; Deut 7:6; 2 Chr 5:13-14; Isa 11:1-16; John 1:14; 1 Cor 3:9-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16-18; Eph 2:19-22; 1 Pet 2:4-10; Rev 3:12; 21:1-3, 22<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The New Community<\/h3>\n<p>The New Testament draws attention to the importance of the Christian community, an emphasis that sometimes gets lost in individualistic cultures. Though believers in Christ are individually converted and born again to a new life (John 3:3; 1 Pet 1:23), we are not intended to remain in isolation. God’s purpose is to build us together as “living stones” in his “spiritual temple” (1 Pet 2:5). God no longer inhabits a building on Mount Zion in Jerusalem; he now lives in and among his people by the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>The promise that God would rebuild his temple (see Ezek 40–48) has been fulfilled as God dwells among his people (see John 1:14), who themselves constitute the “temple” under the new covenant. Only as we join together in worship, praise, and service will we function in the way God intended. Christians enjoy together the wonderful blessing of being the people God has chosen to carry out his mission to the world.<\/p>\n<p>As 1 Peter 2:9 makes clear, the church is now what Israel was originally, a “chosen people” (see Deut 7:6), “royal priests,” “a holy nation” (see Exod 19:6), and God’s “very own possession” (see Exod 19:5). With that privileged status comes the responsibility to proclaim God to the nations. As we join in harmonious worship and together serve in various ministries, we “show others the goodness of God” (1 Pet 2:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:3; Exod 19:4-6; Deut 7:6; 2 Chr 5:13-14; Isa 11:1-16; John 1:14; 1 Cor 3:9-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16-18; Eph 2:19-22; 1 Pet 2:4-10; Rev 3:12; 21:1-3, 22<\/p>","summary_ro":"The New Community The New Testament draws attention to the importance of the Christian community, an emphasis that sometimes gets lost in individualistic cultures. Though believers in Christ are individually converted and born again to a new life (John 3:3; 1 Pet 1:23), we are not intended to remain in isolation. God’s purpose is to build us together as “living stones” in his “spiritual temple” (1 Pet 2:5). God no longer inhabits a building on Mount Zion in Jerusalem; he now lives in and amon...","summary_en":"The New Community The New Testament draws attention to the importance of the Christian community, an emphasis that sometimes gets lost in individualistic cultures. Though believers in Christ are individually converted and born again to a new life (John 3:3; 1 Pet 1:23), we are not intended to remain in isolation. God’s purpose is to build us together as “living stones” in his “spiritual temple” (1 Pet 2:5). God no longer inhabits a building on Mount Zion in Jerusalem; he now lives in and amon...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143604,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Cloud and Fire","title_en":"The Cloud and Fire","content_ro":"<h3>The Cloud and Fire<\/h3>\n<p>When Israel was in the wilderness, God led the nation with a pillar of cloud and fire. The pillar joined the Israelites right after the first Passover, immediately after Israel left Egypt (Exod 13:20-22).<\/p>\n<p>The pillar served a variety of functions. When the Egyptians pursued the Israelites, the cloud moved behind the people of Israel and prevented an Egyptian advance (Exod 14:19-20). Through the rest of Israel’s travels, it was a visible indication that “the <span>Lord<\/span> went ahead of them” (Exod 13:21). When the pillar settled over the Tabernacle and the camp of Israel, it represented the Lord’s presence and protection. The cloud and fire also provided divine guidance by indicating when the Israelites should move (Exod 40:36-38; Num 9:17-23). When the pillar was stationary, Israel stayed where they were. When it lifted and moved on, the Israelites broke camp and followed. They camped in different places for varying amounts of time, sometimes briefly and sometimes for a longer period. Israel thus “camped or traveled at the <span>Lord<\/span>’s command” (Num 9:23). The pillar of cloud and fire was like a divine banner flying over the tribes on the march (cp. 10:14, 18, 22, 25).<\/p>\n<p>The pillar regularly appeared as a cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night (9:15-16; Exod 13:21). In the Bible, both fire and clouds often indicate the presence and glory of God (e.g., Exod 19:16-18; 24:15-18; Matt 17:5; 24:30; Acts 1:9; cp. Ps 18:8-13). The cloud and fire imagery indicated that God’s presence and glory moved with Israel through the wilderness. This special manifestation of God (a <em>theophany<\/em>) stayed with them “throughout all their journeys” while they were in the wilderness (Exod 40:38; see also Exod 13:22). Sometimes, “the cloud covered the Tabernacle, and the glory of the <span>Lord<\/span> filled the Tabernacle,” so that “Moses could no longer enter the Tabernacle” (Exod 40:34-35). On other occasions, the cloud descended and hovered near the entrance to the Tent of Meeting, indicating that the Lord was speaking with Moses “face to face” (Exod 33:7-11; cp. Num 11:25; 12:5; Deut 31:15). The pillar of cloud and fire was a constant, reassuring reminder of the Lord’s presence. We are not given any specific description of the fire and the cloud other than that it was shaped like a pillar; regardless, it was a powerful symbol of God’s special care for Israel (see Neh 9:19-21; cp. Pss 46:1; 139; John 1:14; Rom 8:31-39).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 13:20-22; 14:19-24; 16:10; 19:16-18; 24:15-18; 33:7-11; 40:34-38; Lev 16:2; Num 9:15-23; 10:11-12, 34; 11:25; 12:5, 10; 14:14; 16:42; Deut 31:15; 1 Kgs 8:11; 2 Chr 5:14; Neh 9:19-21; Pss 78:14; 99:7; 104:3; Ezek 1:4-5; 10:3; Matt 17:5; 24:30; 26:64; Luke 9:34-35; Acts 1:9; 1 Cor 10:2; 1 Thes 4:17; Rev 1:7; 14:14-16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Cloud and Fire<\/h3>\n<p>When Israel was in the wilderness, God led the nation with a pillar of cloud and fire. The pillar joined the Israelites right after the first Passover, immediately after Israel left Egypt (Exod 13:20-22).<\/p>\n<p>The pillar served a variety of functions. When the Egyptians pursued the Israelites, the cloud moved behind the people of Israel and prevented an Egyptian advance (Exod 14:19-20). Through the rest of Israel’s travels, it was a visible indication that “the <span>Lord<\/span> went ahead of them” (Exod 13:21). When the pillar settled over the Tabernacle and the camp of Israel, it represented the Lord’s presence and protection. The cloud and fire also provided divine guidance by indicating when the Israelites should move (Exod 40:36-38; Num 9:17-23). When the pillar was stationary, Israel stayed where they were. When it lifted and moved on, the Israelites broke camp and followed. They camped in different places for varying amounts of time, sometimes briefly and sometimes for a longer period. Israel thus “camped or traveled at the <span>Lord<\/span>’s command” (Num 9:23). The pillar of cloud and fire was like a divine banner flying over the tribes on the march (cp. 10:14, 18, 22, 25).<\/p>\n<p>The pillar regularly appeared as a cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night (9:15-16; Exod 13:21). In the Bible, both fire and clouds often indicate the presence and glory of God (e.g., Exod 19:16-18; 24:15-18; Matt 17:5; 24:30; Acts 1:9; cp. Ps 18:8-13). The cloud and fire imagery indicated that God’s presence and glory moved with Israel through the wilderness. This special manifestation of God (a <em>theophany<\/em>) stayed with them “throughout all their journeys” while they were in the wilderness (Exod 40:38; see also Exod 13:22). Sometimes, “the cloud covered the Tabernacle, and the glory of the <span>Lord<\/span> filled the Tabernacle,” so that “Moses could no longer enter the Tabernacle” (Exod 40:34-35). On other occasions, the cloud descended and hovered near the entrance to the Tent of Meeting, indicating that the Lord was speaking with Moses “face to face” (Exod 33:7-11; cp. Num 11:25; 12:5; Deut 31:15). The pillar of cloud and fire was a constant, reassuring reminder of the Lord’s presence. We are not given any specific description of the fire and the cloud other than that it was shaped like a pillar; regardless, it was a powerful symbol of God’s special care for Israel (see Neh 9:19-21; cp. Pss 46:1; 139; John 1:14; Rom 8:31-39).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 13:20-22; 14:19-24; 16:10; 19:16-18; 24:15-18; 33:7-11; 40:34-38; Lev 16:2; Num 9:15-23; 10:11-12, 34; 11:25; 12:5, 10; 14:14; 16:42; Deut 31:15; 1 Kgs 8:11; 2 Chr 5:14; Neh 9:19-21; Pss 78:14; 99:7; 104:3; Ezek 1:4-5; 10:3; Matt 17:5; 24:30; 26:64; Luke 9:34-35; Acts 1:9; 1 Cor 10:2; 1 Thes 4:17; Rev 1:7; 14:14-16<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Cloud and Fire When Israel was in the wilderness, God led the nation with a pillar of cloud and fire. The pillar joined the Israelites right after the first Passover, immediately after Israel left Egypt (Exod 13:20-22). The pillar served a variety of functions. When the Egyptians pursued the Israelites, the cloud moved behind the people of Israel and prevented an Egyptian advance (Exod 14:19-20). Through the rest of Israel’s travels, it was a visible indication that “the Lord went ahead o...","summary_en":"The Cloud and Fire When Israel was in the wilderness, God led the nation with a pillar of cloud and fire. The pillar joined the Israelites right after the first Passover, immediately after Israel left Egypt (Exod 13:20-22). The pillar served a variety of functions. When the Egyptians pursued the Israelites, the cloud moved behind the people of Israel and prevented an Egyptian advance (Exod 14:19-20). Through the rest of Israel’s travels, it was a visible indication that “the Lord went ahead o...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143661,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Central Sanctuary","title_en":"The Central Sanctuary","content_ro":"<h3>The Central Sanctuary<\/h3>\n<p>God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>God is <em>transcendent<\/em> (above all things) and <em>omnipresent<\/em> (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple belonged to him and bore his name, so they were, in a sense, his dwelling places. In the ancient Near East, names were more than labels. They represented the character and nature of the named individuals (e.g., Jacob, Gen 27:36; Jesus, Matt 1:21; Barnabas, Acts 4:36; Peter, Matt 16:17-19). Thus Solomon could advise, “Choose a good reputation [<em>name<\/em>] over great riches” (Prov 22:1).<\/p>\n<p>God made his home in a sanctuary that bore his name. His glorious presence manifested in fire and cloud during the wilderness wanderings served as a constant reminder that he was at home among his people (Exod 40:34-35); likewise, upon the completion of the Temple, his presence was evidenced (1 Kgs 8:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>God would later come to dwell among his people in the person of Jesus Christ (John 1:14), thereby eliminating the need for a central sanctuary (see John 4:19-24). And now, because of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, all believers are able to house God’s presence (1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:8-9, 22, 40; 26:30; 33:7-11; 40:34-35; Num 7:1; 11:16; Deut 12:4-7; 31:14-15; 1 Kgs 8:10-11, 27; John 1:14; 2:19-21; Acts 7:44; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; Heb 8:2, 5; Rev 21:22<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Central Sanctuary<\/h3>\n<p>God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>God is <em>transcendent<\/em> (above all things) and <em>omnipresent<\/em> (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple belonged to him and bore his name, so they were, in a sense, his dwelling places. In the ancient Near East, names were more than labels. They represented the character and nature of the named individuals (e.g., Jacob, Gen 27:36; Jesus, Matt 1:21; Barnabas, Acts 4:36; Peter, Matt 16:17-19). Thus Solomon could advise, “Choose a good reputation [<em>name<\/em>] over great riches” (Prov 22:1).<\/p>\n<p>God made his home in a sanctuary that bore his name. His glorious presence manifested in fire and cloud during the wilderness wanderings served as a constant reminder that he was at home among his people (Exod 40:34-35); likewise, upon the completion of the Temple, his presence was evidenced (1 Kgs 8:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>God would later come to dwell among his people in the person of Jesus Christ (John 1:14), thereby eliminating the need for a central sanctuary (see John 4:19-24). And now, because of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, all believers are able to house God’s presence (1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:8-9, 22, 40; 26:30; 33:7-11; 40:34-35; Num 7:1; 11:16; Deut 12:4-7; 31:14-15; 1 Kgs 8:10-11, 27; John 1:14; 2:19-21; Acts 7:44; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; Heb 8:2, 5; Rev 21:22<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Central Sanctuary God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem. God is transcendent (above all things) and omnipresent (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple ...","summary_en":"The Central Sanctuary God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem. God is transcendent (above all things) and omnipresent (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":144313,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Jerusalem","title_en":"Jerusalem","content_ro":"<h3>Jerusalem<\/h3>\n<p>Jerusalem was a functioning city as early as four hundred years before the time of David. It was never fully captured during the conquest and the period of the judges (Josh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21), and peaceful relations were evidently established between the autonomous Jebusite enclave and the surrounding Israelites (Judg 19:10-12). So impregnable was Jerusalem that the Old Testament records only three successful invaders: David, Jehoash (2 Kgs 14:11-14), and Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon (2 Kgs 25:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Whatever David’s method of capturing Jerusalem (his use of a water tunnel is debatable—see study note on 5:8), he secured Jerusalem as the political, and eventually spiritual, capital of Israel. Psalm 48 speaks beautifully and powerfully of Jerusalem as a fortress. Its towers, bulwarks, and easily defensible citadels with their rugged terrain could produce a false sense of security, if not idolatry. Psalm 48:1-3 reminds the reader that God’s living presence, not the topography of the city, made Jerusalem safe.<\/p>\n<p>Both the Old Testament and the New Testament call Jerusalem a “holy city” (see Neh 11:1, 18; Isa 52:1; Dan 9:24; Matt 4:5; 27:53; Rev 21:2). It is the only city so described in the Bible. Wherein lies this city’s holiness? It cannot be a reflection of the holiness of its occupants. In fact, so unholy was the populace that the city was decimated by the Babylonians in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. Nor was it a holy city because it was Israel’s capital for several centuries. Jerusalem was a holy city, first of all, because God chose it (1 Kgs 8:44, 48; 11:13, 32, 36; 2 Chr 6:5, 34). And because he chose it, he put his glory and his name there (see 1 Kgs 14:21; 2 Chr 12:13; Ezek 8–10; 43:1-27).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels and Acts, Jerusalem was still a city of great importance. Herod the Great (37–4 <span>BC<\/span>) had expanded the city and conducted extensive building projects—including the Temple. It remained the center of Israel’s spiritual life (see e.g., Acts 2:46; 3:1-26; 5:12), and many events in the lives of Jesus and his followers occurred in Jerusalem. Jesus had some harsh words for Jerusalem (see Matt 23:37-39)—especially its leadership—and he was eventually put to death there. Jesus warned of impending judgment on the city (see Mark 13:1-2; Luke 21:20-24), and his words were actualized in the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans in <span>AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\n<p>But the New Testament also introduces the new Jerusalem, the heavenly city comprised of God’s holy people (Heb 11:10; Rev 3:12; 21:2). As the earthly Jerusalem was the sphere in which the glorious presence and reign of God was partially actualized through King David and his successors, the new Jerusalem represents the government of Jesus Christ, the son of David, and his everlasting presence with his people (cp. John 1:14; Rev 21:3).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Josh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21; 2 Sam 5:6-9; 1 Kgs 8:1; 2 Kgs 18:13-17; 25:1-10; 2 Chr 3:1; 12:1-12; 26:9, 15; 32:1-5, 27-30; Ezra 1:1-6; Neh 1:1–6:19; Ps 48:1-3; 125:2; Isa 14:32; 52:1-3; Gal 4:25-26; Heb 12:22-24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jerusalem<\/h3>\n<p>Jerusalem was a functioning city as early as four hundred years before the time of David. It was never fully captured during the conquest and the period of the judges (Josh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21), and peaceful relations were evidently established between the autonomous Jebusite enclave and the surrounding Israelites (Judg 19:10-12). So impregnable was Jerusalem that the Old Testament records only three successful invaders: David, Jehoash (2 Kgs 14:11-14), and Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon (2 Kgs 25:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Whatever David’s method of capturing Jerusalem (his use of a water tunnel is debatable—see study note on 5:8), he secured Jerusalem as the political, and eventually spiritual, capital of Israel. Psalm 48 speaks beautifully and powerfully of Jerusalem as a fortress. Its towers, bulwarks, and easily defensible citadels with their rugged terrain could produce a false sense of security, if not idolatry. Psalm 48:1-3 reminds the reader that God’s living presence, not the topography of the city, made Jerusalem safe.<\/p>\n<p>Both the Old Testament and the New Testament call Jerusalem a “holy city” (see Neh 11:1, 18; Isa 52:1; Dan 9:24; Matt 4:5; 27:53; Rev 21:2). It is the only city so described in the Bible. Wherein lies this city’s holiness? It cannot be a reflection of the holiness of its occupants. In fact, so unholy was the populace that the city was decimated by the Babylonians in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. Nor was it a holy city because it was Israel’s capital for several centuries. Jerusalem was a holy city, first of all, because God chose it (1 Kgs 8:44, 48; 11:13, 32, 36; 2 Chr 6:5, 34). And because he chose it, he put his glory and his name there (see 1 Kgs 14:21; 2 Chr 12:13; Ezek 8–10; 43:1-27).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels and Acts, Jerusalem was still a city of great importance. Herod the Great (37–4 <span>BC<\/span>) had expanded the city and conducted extensive building projects—including the Temple. It remained the center of Israel’s spiritual life (see e.g., Acts 2:46; 3:1-26; 5:12), and many events in the lives of Jesus and his followers occurred in Jerusalem. Jesus had some harsh words for Jerusalem (see Matt 23:37-39)—especially its leadership—and he was eventually put to death there. Jesus warned of impending judgment on the city (see Mark 13:1-2; Luke 21:20-24), and his words were actualized in the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans in <span>AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\n<p>But the New Testament also introduces the new Jerusalem, the heavenly city comprised of God’s holy people (Heb 11:10; Rev 3:12; 21:2). As the earthly Jerusalem was the sphere in which the glorious presence and reign of God was partially actualized through King David and his successors, the new Jerusalem represents the government of Jesus Christ, the son of David, and his everlasting presence with his people (cp. John 1:14; Rev 21:3).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Josh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21; 2 Sam 5:6-9; 1 Kgs 8:1; 2 Kgs 18:13-17; 25:1-10; 2 Chr 3:1; 12:1-12; 26:9, 15; 32:1-5, 27-30; Ezra 1:1-6; Neh 1:1–6:19; Ps 48:1-3; 125:2; Isa 14:32; 52:1-3; Gal 4:25-26; Heb 12:22-24<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jerusalem Jerusalem was a functioning city as early as four hundred years before the time of David. It was never fully captured during the conquest and the period of the judges (Josh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21), and peaceful relations were evidently established between the autonomous Jebusite enclave and the surrounding Israelites (Judg 19:10-12). So impregnable was Jerusalem that the Old Testament records only three successful invaders: David, Jehoash (2 Kgs 14:11-14), and Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon...","summary_en":"Jerusalem Jerusalem was a functioning city as early as four hundred years before the time of David. It was never fully captured during the conquest and the period of the judges (Josh 15:63; Judg 1:8, 21), and peaceful relations were evidently established between the autonomous Jebusite enclave and the surrounding Israelites (Judg 19:10-12). So impregnable was Jerusalem that the Old Testament records only three successful invaders: David, Jehoash (2 Kgs 14:11-14), and Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147225,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Glory with His People","title_en":"God’s Glory with His People","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Glory with His People<\/h3>\n<p>In ancient Israel, God’s glory was particularly manifest at the central sanctuaries that had been built for him. When the Israelites completed construction of the Tabernacle, that sacred space became filled with the glory of the Lord (Exod 40:34-35). Likewise, after the Temple was completed and the Ark of the Covenant was brought in, God’s glorious presence filled the Temple (1 Kgs 8:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>The presence and absence of God’s glory is a central theme in the book of Ezekiel. God’s glory appears to the prophet Ezekiel while he is exiled in Babylon, meaning that his glory was no longer present at the Temple in Jerusalem. The reason God’s glory had departed from the Temple at that time becomes clear in Ezekiel’s vision in Ezekiel 8–11, in which the prophet sees the abominations that had polluted the Temple in Jerusalem. Without God’s presence, the Temple had become an empty shell awaiting destruction. God was not forcibly evicted by the superior might of the Babylonian army; he voluntarily departed because his people were defiled. Their sin drove him away from the land he had promised to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. For a time, the Lord went from Jerusalem to Babylon to become a sanctuary for the exiles there (see 11:16).<\/p>\n<p>God would not abandon his Temple forever. After pouring out his wrath in full measure, he would restore a remnant to their land and sanctify them by his Spirit so that he could once again dwell in their midst in a new sanctuary (37:26). God’s glory, dwelling among his people forever (43:1-5), is at the heart of Ezekiel’s vision of their restoration.<\/p>\n<p>The glory of God has come to live among us fully in the person of Jesus Christ. As John testifies, “We have seen his glory, the glory of the Father’s one and only Son” (John 1:14). The aged Simeon saw the baby Jesus brought to the Temple and described him as “a light to reveal God to the nations, and . . . the glory of your people Israel” (Luke 2:32). Jesus’ glory was veiled while he was on earth, though for a moment on the Mount of Transfiguration his radiance was revealed to his closest disciples (Matt 17:2). He experienced his own abandonment by God as he hung on the cross, bearing the curse for our sin (Matt 27:46). Now, as the exalted and glorified Lord, he sits at God’s right hand (Eph 1:19-20). By his Spirit, he has promised never to abandon us, but to be with us to the end of time (Matt 28:20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 15:11; 33:18–34:8; 40:34; Ps 19:1-11; Isa 4:5-6; 6:3; 40:5; 42:8; 43:7; 58:8; 60:1-2; Ezek 1:1-28; 11:16; 37:26; 43:1-5; 44:4; Hab 2:14; Matt 17:2; 28:20; Luke 2:32; John 1:14; 2 Cor 4:4-6; Heb 1:3; Rev 21:10-11, 23<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Glory with His People<\/h3>\n<p>In ancient Israel, God’s glory was particularly manifest at the central sanctuaries that had been built for him. When the Israelites completed construction of the Tabernacle, that sacred space became filled with the glory of the Lord (Exod 40:34-35). Likewise, after the Temple was completed and the Ark of the Covenant was brought in, God’s glorious presence filled the Temple (1 Kgs 8:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>The presence and absence of God’s glory is a central theme in the book of Ezekiel. God’s glory appears to the prophet Ezekiel while he is exiled in Babylon, meaning that his glory was no longer present at the Temple in Jerusalem. The reason God’s glory had departed from the Temple at that time becomes clear in Ezekiel’s vision in Ezekiel 8–11, in which the prophet sees the abominations that had polluted the Temple in Jerusalem. Without God’s presence, the Temple had become an empty shell awaiting destruction. God was not forcibly evicted by the superior might of the Babylonian army; he voluntarily departed because his people were defiled. Their sin drove him away from the land he had promised to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. For a time, the Lord went from Jerusalem to Babylon to become a sanctuary for the exiles there (see 11:16).<\/p>\n<p>God would not abandon his Temple forever. After pouring out his wrath in full measure, he would restore a remnant to their land and sanctify them by his Spirit so that he could once again dwell in their midst in a new sanctuary (37:26). God’s glory, dwelling among his people forever (43:1-5), is at the heart of Ezekiel’s vision of their restoration.<\/p>\n<p>The glory of God has come to live among us fully in the person of Jesus Christ. As John testifies, “We have seen his glory, the glory of the Father’s one and only Son” (John 1:14). The aged Simeon saw the baby Jesus brought to the Temple and described him as “a light to reveal God to the nations, and . . . the glory of your people Israel” (Luke 2:32). Jesus’ glory was veiled while he was on earth, though for a moment on the Mount of Transfiguration his radiance was revealed to his closest disciples (Matt 17:2). He experienced his own abandonment by God as he hung on the cross, bearing the curse for our sin (Matt 27:46). Now, as the exalted and glorified Lord, he sits at God’s right hand (Eph 1:19-20). By his Spirit, he has promised never to abandon us, but to be with us to the end of time (Matt 28:20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 15:11; 33:18–34:8; 40:34; Ps 19:1-11; Isa 4:5-6; 6:3; 40:5; 42:8; 43:7; 58:8; 60:1-2; Ezek 1:1-28; 11:16; 37:26; 43:1-5; 44:4; Hab 2:14; Matt 17:2; 28:20; Luke 2:32; John 1:14; 2 Cor 4:4-6; Heb 1:3; Rev 21:10-11, 23<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Glory with His People In ancient Israel, God’s glory was particularly manifest at the central sanctuaries that had been built for him. When the Israelites completed construction of the Tabernacle, that sacred space became filled with the glory of the Lord (Exod 40:34-35). Likewise, after the Temple was completed and the Ark of the Covenant was brought in, God’s glorious presence filled the Temple (1 Kgs 8:10-11). The presence and absence of God’s glory is a central theme in the book of ...","summary_en":"God’s Glory with His People In ancient Israel, God’s glory was particularly manifest at the central sanctuaries that had been built for him. When the Israelites completed construction of the Tabernacle, that sacred space became filled with the glory of the Lord (Exod 40:34-35). Likewise, after the Temple was completed and the Ark of the Covenant was brought in, God’s glorious presence filled the Temple (1 Kgs 8:10-11). The presence and absence of God’s glory is a central theme in the book of ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147701,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Return of God’s Presence with His People","title_en":"The Return of God’s Presence with His People","content_ro":"<h3>The Return of God’s Presence with His People<\/h3>\n<p>The descriptions of the Exile include the tragedy that, as part of his judgment, God withdrew his presence from his people and from the holy city of Jerusalem. This notion is perhaps most clearly demonstrated in a vision of the prophet Ezekiel, who saw a visual depiction of God’s glorious presence leaving the Temple (Ezek 10:1-22; 11:22-23). As such, when the prophets discussed the future restoration of God’s people and their return to the land, they also often spoke of the return of God’s presence (see, e.g., Isa 52:7-8; Ezek 43:1-9).<\/p>\n<p>The prophet Zechariah placed a strong emphasis on this theme of the Lord returning to his people. He was certain that God would once again live among them and that the glory of the Lord would rest in Jerusalem (1:16; 2:5, 10-11; 8:3, 23). God’s presence would return with the rebuilding of the Temple, and Israel would experience spiritual restoration and renewed agricultural bounty (1:17; 4:8-9; 6:15; see also Hag 2:19). In the future, God’s presence would rescue Jerusalem and the people of Israel from enemy nations. The Lord would be enthroned as King over all the earth, and the whole earth would worship the one true God (Zech 9:16; 10:6; 12:9; 14:9). In both the present and the future, the return of the Lord’s presence to Jerusalem was connected with the enabling work of God’s Spirit (4:6; 12:10; see also Hag 2:5).<\/p>\n<p>Zechariah’s promise of the Lord’s presence in Jerusalem anticipated the coming of Jesus the Messiah and the awesome mystery of the Word of God becoming human and living on earth among us (John 1:14).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 26:3; 31:3; Exod 3:12; Deut 31:23; Josh 1:5; Judg 6:16; Isa 7:14; 43:2; 52:8; Ezek 37:27; Joel 3:21; Hag 2:5; Zech 1:16-17; 2:5, 10-11; 4:6; 8:3, 23; 14:9; John 1:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Return of God’s Presence with His People<\/h3>\n<p>The descriptions of the Exile include the tragedy that, as part of his judgment, God withdrew his presence from his people and from the holy city of Jerusalem. This notion is perhaps most clearly demonstrated in a vision of the prophet Ezekiel, who saw a visual depiction of God’s glorious presence leaving the Temple (Ezek 10:1-22; 11:22-23). As such, when the prophets discussed the future restoration of God’s people and their return to the land, they also often spoke of the return of God’s presence (see, e.g., Isa 52:7-8; Ezek 43:1-9).<\/p>\n<p>The prophet Zechariah placed a strong emphasis on this theme of the Lord returning to his people. He was certain that God would once again live among them and that the glory of the Lord would rest in Jerusalem (1:16; 2:5, 10-11; 8:3, 23). God’s presence would return with the rebuilding of the Temple, and Israel would experience spiritual restoration and renewed agricultural bounty (1:17; 4:8-9; 6:15; see also Hag 2:19). In the future, God’s presence would rescue Jerusalem and the people of Israel from enemy nations. The Lord would be enthroned as King over all the earth, and the whole earth would worship the one true God (Zech 9:16; 10:6; 12:9; 14:9). In both the present and the future, the return of the Lord’s presence to Jerusalem was connected with the enabling work of God’s Spirit (4:6; 12:10; see also Hag 2:5).<\/p>\n<p>Zechariah’s promise of the Lord’s presence in Jerusalem anticipated the coming of Jesus the Messiah and the awesome mystery of the Word of God becoming human and living on earth among us (John 1:14).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 26:3; 31:3; Exod 3:12; Deut 31:23; Josh 1:5; Judg 6:16; Isa 7:14; 43:2; 52:8; Ezek 37:27; Joel 3:21; Hag 2:5; Zech 1:16-17; 2:5, 10-11; 4:6; 8:3, 23; 14:9; John 1:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Return of God’s Presence with His People The descriptions of the Exile include the tragedy that, as part of his judgment, God withdrew his presence from his people and from the holy city of Jerusalem. This notion is perhaps most clearly demonstrated in a vision of the prophet Ezekiel, who saw a visual depiction of God’s glorious presence leaving the Temple (Ezek 10:1-22; 11:22-23). As such, when the prophets discussed the future restoration of God’s people and their return to the land, th...","summary_en":"The Return of God’s Presence with His People The descriptions of the Exile include the tragedy that, as part of his judgment, God withdrew his presence from his people and from the holy city of Jerusalem. This notion is perhaps most clearly demonstrated in a vision of the prophet Ezekiel, who saw a visual depiction of God’s glorious presence leaving the Temple (Ezek 10:1-22; 11:22-23). As such, when the prophets discussed the future restoration of God’s people and their return to the land, th...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148683,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Word","title_en":"The Word","content_ro":"<h3>The Word<\/h3>\n<p>John raises the curtain on his Gospel with a stunning description of Jesus Christ as “the Word” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span><em>,<\/em> John 1:1). Both Greek and Jewish listeners in the first century would immediately recognize the profound meaning of this title. Greeks would have thought of the seminal forces that sustain the universe. Jewish minds would have thought back to God creating the world with his word (Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9). In Jesus’ day, the Word of God had taken on creative personal attributes. Jews viewed God’s Word as personifying divine Wisdom. Through Wisdom, God extended himself into the cosmos, creating the world (Prov 8:22-31).<\/p>\n<p>John makes it clear that Jesus shares the same essence as God; the Son existed before time, and he was the agent of all creation. John anchors the divinity of Jesus in this ancient Jewish concept of Wisdom. The divine Wisdom that has existed with God from before time can now be known in Jesus Christ. In perhaps the most striking verse penned by an apostle, John writes that this Logos, this Wisdom, became flesh and lived among us as a human (John 1:14). What God is, the Logos is, and the Logos is Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9; Prov 8:22-31; Isa 40:8; John 1:1-18; 1 Jn 1:1; Rev 19:13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Word<\/h3>\n<p>John raises the curtain on his Gospel with a stunning description of Jesus Christ as “the Word” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span><em>,<\/em> John 1:1). Both Greek and Jewish listeners in the first century would immediately recognize the profound meaning of this title. Greeks would have thought of the seminal forces that sustain the universe. Jewish minds would have thought back to God creating the world with his word (Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9). In Jesus’ day, the Word of God had taken on creative personal attributes. Jews viewed God’s Word as personifying divine Wisdom. Through Wisdom, God extended himself into the cosmos, creating the world (Prov 8:22-31).<\/p>\n<p>John makes it clear that Jesus shares the same essence as God; the Son existed before time, and he was the agent of all creation. John anchors the divinity of Jesus in this ancient Jewish concept of Wisdom. The divine Wisdom that has existed with God from before time can now be known in Jesus Christ. In perhaps the most striking verse penned by an apostle, John writes that this Logos, this Wisdom, became flesh and lived among us as a human (John 1:14). What God is, the Logos is, and the Logos is Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9; Prov 8:22-31; Isa 40:8; John 1:1-18; 1 Jn 1:1; Rev 19:13<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Word John raises the curtain on his Gospel with a stunning description of Jesus Christ as “the Word” (Greek logos, John 1:1). Both Greek and Jewish listeners in the first century would immediately recognize the profound meaning of this title. Greeks would have thought of the seminal forces that sustain the universe. Jewish minds would have thought back to God creating the world with his word (Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9). In Jesus’ day, the Word of God had taken on creative personal attributes...","summary_en":"The Word John raises the curtain on his Gospel with a stunning description of Jesus Christ as “the Word” (Greek logos, John 1:1). Both Greek and Jewish listeners in the first century would immediately recognize the profound meaning of this title. Greeks would have thought of the seminal forces that sustain the universe. Jewish minds would have thought back to God creating the world with his word (Gen 1:3-28; Ps 33:6, 9). In Jesus’ day, the Word of God had taken on creative personal attributes...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":149256,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miracles","title_en":"Miracles","content_ro":"<h3>Miracles<\/h3>\n<p>Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in more than the miracle itself (see John 12:37). Miracles remind us of the truth that anything is possible for God (Mark 9:21-23; cp. Matt 19:26; Mark 10:27; Luke 1:37; 18:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus performed many miracles during his ministry including physical healings, exorcisms, nature miracles, and raising the dead. Jesus demonstrated a deep love for humankind in the way he responded to people’s needs, and many people followed him in response to his miracles (John 6:2), though he cautioned against following him just because of the miracles (John 6:26). Perhaps the three greatest miracles that occurred in relation to Jesus are (1) his coming as the Word of God in human flesh (John 1:14), (2) his glorious resurrection from the dead (Matt 28; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-53; John 20:1-31; Acts 1:3; 1 Cor 15:3-8; cp Acts 23:6; 26:8), and (3) the miracle of the new birth (John 3:3-8; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:8-10). The coming of Jesus into the world to be the Savior and to die for our sins shows us how much God loves us (John 3:16; Rom 5:8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5; 1 Jn 3:1-2). The fact that God raised Jesus from the dead reveals God’s power over death and gives us a living hope, the promise of eternal life (1 Pet 1:3-9). And the person who puts faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord is born anew as a child of God and receives eternal life (John 1:12; 3:36; Rom 5:1-2; 1 Jn 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>The miraculous activity of Jesus continued in the work of his followers, as demonstrated throughout the book of Acts (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-15; 6:8; 8:6-7; 9:32-42; 14:3). Filled with the Holy Spirit, the apostles and other Christian leaders performed these miraculous signs, wonders, and mighty works, often in order to offer tangible evidence of the power and truth of the Christian message (14:3; see John 3:2; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 19:23-26; 28:1-20; Mark 10:23-27; Luke 1:30-38; 18:24-27; 24:1-53; John 1:12-14; 3:2-8, 16; 20:1–21:25; Acts 4:29-31; 5:12-16; 6:8; 8:4-23; 9:32-42; 14:3-4; 26:8; Rom 5:1, 8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5, 8-10; Heb 2:4; 1 Pet 1:3-5; 1 Jn 5:12-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miracles<\/h3>\n<p>Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in more than the miracle itself (see John 12:37). Miracles remind us of the truth that anything is possible for God (Mark 9:21-23; cp. Matt 19:26; Mark 10:27; Luke 1:37; 18:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus performed many miracles during his ministry including physical healings, exorcisms, nature miracles, and raising the dead. Jesus demonstrated a deep love for humankind in the way he responded to people’s needs, and many people followed him in response to his miracles (John 6:2), though he cautioned against following him just because of the miracles (John 6:26). Perhaps the three greatest miracles that occurred in relation to Jesus are (1) his coming as the Word of God in human flesh (John 1:14), (2) his glorious resurrection from the dead (Matt 28; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-53; John 20:1-31; Acts 1:3; 1 Cor 15:3-8; cp Acts 23:6; 26:8), and (3) the miracle of the new birth (John 3:3-8; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:8-10). The coming of Jesus into the world to be the Savior and to die for our sins shows us how much God loves us (John 3:16; Rom 5:8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5; 1 Jn 3:1-2). The fact that God raised Jesus from the dead reveals God’s power over death and gives us a living hope, the promise of eternal life (1 Pet 1:3-9). And the person who puts faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord is born anew as a child of God and receives eternal life (John 1:12; 3:36; Rom 5:1-2; 1 Jn 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>The miraculous activity of Jesus continued in the work of his followers, as demonstrated throughout the book of Acts (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-15; 6:8; 8:6-7; 9:32-42; 14:3). Filled with the Holy Spirit, the apostles and other Christian leaders performed these miraculous signs, wonders, and mighty works, often in order to offer tangible evidence of the power and truth of the Christian message (14:3; see John 3:2; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 19:23-26; 28:1-20; Mark 10:23-27; Luke 1:30-38; 18:24-27; 24:1-53; John 1:12-14; 3:2-8, 16; 20:1–21:25; Acts 4:29-31; 5:12-16; 6:8; 8:4-23; 9:32-42; 14:3-4; 26:8; Rom 5:1, 8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5, 8-10; Heb 2:4; 1 Pet 1:3-5; 1 Jn 5:12-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miracles Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in ...","summary_en":"Miracles Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":149415,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Grace of God","title_en":"The Grace of God","content_ro":"<h3>The Grace of God<\/h3>\n<p><em>Grace<\/em> is a key word in the Bible. It is used to indicate God’s kindness and favor, often in terms of salvation to the undeserving. The New Testament stresses that grace came through Jesus Christ (John 1:14-17). This is not to say that God’s grace was not active in the Old Testament; rather, God’s gracious activity toward humanity reached its culmination through his Son.<\/p>\n<p>According to the book of Acts, God’s great favor was initially experienced in the Jewish community (see Acts 11:19-21; 13:43-49); later, it became clear that God’s grace in Jesus Christ extends to Gentiles as well (Acts 15:8-9; Eph 2:11-18; Titus 2:11). Signs and wonders attested the reality of God’s grace at work among the Gentiles (Acts 14:3).<\/p>\n<p>Paul proclaimed the Good News “about the wonderful grace of God” (Acts 20:24). Paul never seeks to prove that God is gracious, but he assumes it as a fact when he presents the Good News (see, e.g., Rom 3:24; 5:15-21). Paul rules out any idea that we merit our salvation, because God acts solely by his grace (Rom 4:4-5; Eph 2:4-9). Our good works do not give us right standing with God—if they did, God would be obliged to reward us for our efforts, just as a worker earns a wage (see Rom 11:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>God’s grace continues to impact believers throughout their lives—not just in the moment of conversion. Second Peter closes with a command for Christians to “grow in the grace” of Jesus Christ (2 Pet 3:18). Paul encouraged Christians to “continue to rely on the grace of God” as they remained faithful to their Lord (Acts 13:43). And when Paul left the Ephesian elders, he commended them “to God and the message of his grace,” the divine message that was able to build them up and sustain them (Acts 20:32; see 15:40). God’s grace is at the core of the Christian message and the Christian experience, from beginning to end. It is no wonder that the theme of grace is so prevalent in the writings of Jesus’ early followers.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 34:5-7; Num 6:22-27; Ezra 9:8; Pss 30:5; 31:16; Ps 84:11; Isa 60:10; 61:1-3; Hos 14:1-9; Luke 4:18-19; Acts 15:11; 20:24; Rom 5:15-17, 20-21; 12:6; 2 Cor 6:1; 8:9; 12:9; Gal 2:21; 4:10; 5:3-6; Eph 1:3-8; 2:4-10; 2 Tim 1:9; 2:1; Titus 2:11; 3:7; Heb 2:9; 4:16; 13:9; Jas 4:6; 1 Pet 5:5-6, 12; 2 Pet 3:17-18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Grace of God<\/h3>\n<p><em>Grace<\/em> is a key word in the Bible. It is used to indicate God’s kindness and favor, often in terms of salvation to the undeserving. The New Testament stresses that grace came through Jesus Christ (John 1:14-17). This is not to say that God’s grace was not active in the Old Testament; rather, God’s gracious activity toward humanity reached its culmination through his Son.<\/p>\n<p>According to the book of Acts, God’s great favor was initially experienced in the Jewish community (see Acts 11:19-21; 13:43-49); later, it became clear that God’s grace in Jesus Christ extends to Gentiles as well (Acts 15:8-9; Eph 2:11-18; Titus 2:11). Signs and wonders attested the reality of God’s grace at work among the Gentiles (Acts 14:3).<\/p>\n<p>Paul proclaimed the Good News “about the wonderful grace of God” (Acts 20:24). Paul never seeks to prove that God is gracious, but he assumes it as a fact when he presents the Good News (see, e.g., Rom 3:24; 5:15-21). Paul rules out any idea that we merit our salvation, because God acts solely by his grace (Rom 4:4-5; Eph 2:4-9). Our good works do not give us right standing with God—if they did, God would be obliged to reward us for our efforts, just as a worker earns a wage (see Rom 11:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>God’s grace continues to impact believers throughout their lives—not just in the moment of conversion. Second Peter closes with a command for Christians to “grow in the grace” of Jesus Christ (2 Pet 3:18). Paul encouraged Christians to “continue to rely on the grace of God” as they remained faithful to their Lord (Acts 13:43). And when Paul left the Ephesian elders, he commended them “to God and the message of his grace,” the divine message that was able to build them up and sustain them (Acts 20:32; see 15:40). God’s grace is at the core of the Christian message and the Christian experience, from beginning to end. It is no wonder that the theme of grace is so prevalent in the writings of Jesus’ early followers.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 34:5-7; Num 6:22-27; Ezra 9:8; Pss 30:5; 31:16; Ps 84:11; Isa 60:10; 61:1-3; Hos 14:1-9; Luke 4:18-19; Acts 15:11; 20:24; Rom 5:15-17, 20-21; 12:6; 2 Cor 6:1; 8:9; 12:9; Gal 2:21; 4:10; 5:3-6; Eph 1:3-8; 2:4-10; 2 Tim 1:9; 2:1; Titus 2:11; 3:7; Heb 2:9; 4:16; 13:9; Jas 4:6; 1 Pet 5:5-6, 12; 2 Pet 3:17-18<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Grace of God Grace is a key word in the Bible. It is used to indicate God’s kindness and favor, often in terms of salvation to the undeserving. The New Testament stresses that grace came through Jesus Christ (John 1:14-17). This is not to say that God’s grace was not active in the Old Testament; rather, God’s gracious activity toward humanity reached its culmination through his Son. According to the book of Acts, God’s great favor was initially experienced in the Jewish community (see Act...","summary_en":"The Grace of God Grace is a key word in the Bible. It is used to indicate God’s kindness and favor, often in terms of salvation to the undeserving. The New Testament stresses that grace came through Jesus Christ (John 1:14-17). This is not to say that God’s grace was not active in the Old Testament; rather, God’s gracious activity toward humanity reached its culmination through his Son. According to the book of Acts, God’s great favor was initially experienced in the Jewish community (see Act...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":150075,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Church as God’s Temple","title_en":"The Church as God’s Temple","content_ro":"<h3>The Church as God’s Temple<\/h3>\n<p>The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 <span>BC<\/span> but was destroyed in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7; Ezek 40–43).<\/p>\n<p>While the Temple in Jerusalem was rebuilt after the Exile—and reached a pinnacle during the renovations of Herod the Great—the hopes of God’s people were ultimately fulfilled in the coming of Jesus (see John 1:14; 2:19-22; 4:21-24). He himself is God’s temple, the place where God’s holiness resides, and he calls his people to join him. Thus, God’s people are to be a holy temple of God, a dwelling place for the Holy Spirit (see 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; 1 Pet 2:5; Rev 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>Paul called on believers to realize their identity as God’s “holy people” (2 Cor 1:1) in two ways: They were to separate themselves from moral evil, and they were to be dedicated to God in holy living and service. Christians are therefore urged, “Let us cleanse ourselves from everything that can defile our body or spirit. And let us work toward complete holiness because we fear God” (2 Cor 7:1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 8:12-53; 2 Chr 6:20; Pss 11:4; 27:4-6; Zech 6:12-15; Matt 18:20; John 2:18-22; 14:20; 17:23; Rom 8:10; 1 Cor 3:10-17; 6:18-20; 9:11-14; 2 Cor 6:14–7:1; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:20-22; 3:17-19; Col 1:27; Heb 3:6; 12:18-24; 1 Pet 2:4-9; Rev 1:12-16; 3:12, 20; 21:22<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Church as God’s Temple<\/h3>\n<p>The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 <span>BC<\/span> but was destroyed in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7; Ezek 40–43).<\/p>\n<p>While the Temple in Jerusalem was rebuilt after the Exile—and reached a pinnacle during the renovations of Herod the Great—the hopes of God’s people were ultimately fulfilled in the coming of Jesus (see John 1:14; 2:19-22; 4:21-24). He himself is God’s temple, the place where God’s holiness resides, and he calls his people to join him. Thus, God’s people are to be a holy temple of God, a dwelling place for the Holy Spirit (see 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; 1 Pet 2:5; Rev 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>Paul called on believers to realize their identity as God’s “holy people” (2 Cor 1:1) in two ways: They were to separate themselves from moral evil, and they were to be dedicated to God in holy living and service. Christians are therefore urged, “Let us cleanse ourselves from everything that can defile our body or spirit. And let us work toward complete holiness because we fear God” (2 Cor 7:1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 8:12-53; 2 Chr 6:20; Pss 11:4; 27:4-6; Zech 6:12-15; Matt 18:20; John 2:18-22; 14:20; 17:23; Rom 8:10; 1 Cor 3:10-17; 6:18-20; 9:11-14; 2 Cor 6:14–7:1; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:20-22; 3:17-19; Col 1:27; Heb 3:6; 12:18-24; 1 Pet 2:4-9; Rev 1:12-16; 3:12, 20; 21:22<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Church as God’s Temple The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 BC but was destroyed in 586 BC. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7;...","summary_en":"The Church as God’s Temple The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 BC but was destroyed in 586 BC. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7;...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":150706,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The New Community","title_en":"The New Community","content_ro":"<h3>The New Community<\/h3>\n<p>The New Testament draws attention to the importance of the Christian community, an emphasis that sometimes gets lost in individualistic cultures. Though believers in Christ are individually converted and born again to a new life (John 3:3; 1 Pet 1:23), we are not intended to remain in isolation. God’s purpose is to build us together as “living stones” in his “spiritual temple” (1 Pet 2:5). God no longer inhabits a building on Mount Zion in Jerusalem; he now lives in and among his people by the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>The promise that God would rebuild his temple (see Ezek 40–48) has been fulfilled as God dwells among his people (see John 1:14), who themselves constitute the “temple” under the new covenant. Only as we join together in worship, praise, and service will we function in the way God intended. Christians enjoy together the wonderful blessing of being the people God has chosen to carry out his mission to the world.<\/p>\n<p>As 1 Peter 2:9 makes clear, the church is now what Israel was originally, a “chosen people” (see Deut 7:6), “royal priests,” “a holy nation” (see Exod 19:6), and God’s “very own possession” (see Exod 19:5). With that privileged status comes the responsibility to proclaim God to the nations. As we join in harmonious worship and together serve in various ministries, we “show others the goodness of God” (1 Pet 2:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:3; Exod 19:4-6; Deut 7:6; 2 Chr 5:13-14; Isa 11:1-16; John 1:14; 1 Cor 3:9-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16-18; Eph 2:19-22; 1 Pet 2:4-10; Rev 3:12; 21:1-3, 22<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The New Community<\/h3>\n<p>The New Testament draws attention to the importance of the Christian community, an emphasis that sometimes gets lost in individualistic cultures. Though believers in Christ are individually converted and born again to a new life (John 3:3; 1 Pet 1:23), we are not intended to remain in isolation. God’s purpose is to build us together as “living stones” in his “spiritual temple” (1 Pet 2:5). God no longer inhabits a building on Mount Zion in Jerusalem; he now lives in and among his people by the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>The promise that God would rebuild his temple (see Ezek 40–48) has been fulfilled as God dwells among his people (see John 1:14), who themselves constitute the “temple” under the new covenant. Only as we join together in worship, praise, and service will we function in the way God intended. Christians enjoy together the wonderful blessing of being the people God has chosen to carry out his mission to the world.<\/p>\n<p>As 1 Peter 2:9 makes clear, the church is now what Israel was originally, a “chosen people” (see Deut 7:6), “royal priests,” “a holy nation” (see Exod 19:6), and God’s “very own possession” (see Exod 19:5). With that privileged status comes the responsibility to proclaim God to the nations. As we join in harmonious worship and together serve in various ministries, we “show others the goodness of God” (1 Pet 2:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:3; Exod 19:4-6; Deut 7:6; 2 Chr 5:13-14; Isa 11:1-16; John 1:14; 1 Cor 3:9-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16-18; Eph 2:19-22; 1 Pet 2:4-10; Rev 3:12; 21:1-3, 22<\/p>","summary_ro":"The New Community The New Testament draws attention to the importance of the Christian community, an emphasis that sometimes gets lost in individualistic cultures. Though believers in Christ are individually converted and born again to a new life (John 3:3; 1 Pet 1:23), we are not intended to remain in isolation. God’s purpose is to build us together as “living stones” in his “spiritual temple” (1 Pet 2:5). God no longer inhabits a building on Mount Zion in Jerusalem; he now lives in and amon...","summary_en":"The New Community The New Testament draws attention to the importance of the Christian community, an emphasis that sometimes gets lost in individualistic cultures. Though believers in Christ are individually converted and born again to a new life (John 3:3; 1 Pet 1:23), we are not intended to remain in isolation. God’s purpose is to build us together as “living stones” in his “spiritual temple” (1 Pet 2:5). God no longer inhabits a building on Mount Zion in Jerusalem; he now lives in and amon...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"15":[{"id":20202,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel of John","title_en":"Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>JOHN, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>The fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospels. (See discussion above on John, the Apostle.)<\/p>\n\n<p>The Gospel appears to have been written by one who knew the Jews and the Palestine of Jesus’ day well. He was familiar with Jewish messianic expectations (e.g., Jn 1:20-21; 4:25; 7:40-42; 12:34). He knew of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9) and the contempt the Pharisees had for “the people of the land” (7:49). He knew of the importance attached to the religious schools (v 15). He knew the way the Sabbath was observed and was aware of the provision that the obligation to circumcise on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath regulations (vv 22-23). Throughout the Gospel he moved with certainty in the vast range of Jewish ideas and customs.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same with topography. The writer mentioned many places, and his place-names all seem to be used correctly. He referred to Cana, a village not mentioned in any earlier literature known to us, which means that the reference almost certainly came from someone who actually knew the place. He located Bethany with some precision as about 15 stadia from Jerusalem (about 2 miles, or 3.2 kilometers, 11:18). He had several references to places in or near Jerusalem, such as Bethesda (5:2), Siloam (9:7), and the Kidron Valley (18:1). Of course, this does not rule out some contemporary of John’s, but it makes it difficult to think of the author as a much later individual writing at a distance from Palestine. The evidence as we have it indicates that the writer was a Jew in the Palestine of Jesus’ day.<\/p>\n<p>To many careful readers, it seems that the Gospel bears the stamp of an eyewitness. For example, Jesus was teaching “in the treasury” (8:20). Nothing is made of the point; the incident could easily have been told without it. It looks like a reminiscence of someone who sees the scene in his mind’s eye as he writes. The fact that the house was filled with fragrance when the woman broke the perfume jar (12:3) does not materially affect the account but is the kind of detail that one who was there would remember. The author noted that the loaves used in the feeding of the multitude were barley loaves (6:9) and that Jesus’ tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top to bottom (19:23). He told us that the branches with which Jesus was greeted were palm branches (12:13), and that it was night when Judas went out (13:30). Such touches are found throughout the Gospel, and it seems unjustified to treat them as no more than an attempt to create verisimilitude. They seem much more like indications that the author was writing about events in which he had himself taken part.<\/p>\n<p>The early church accepted Johannine authorship without question. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all see the apostle as the author. The first to quote this Gospel by name was Theophilus of Antioch, about <span>AD<\/span> 180.<\/p>\n<p>Those who object to Johannine authorship emphasize the differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics. The argument is that if Jesus was anything like the Christ portrayed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he could not be like the Christ of the fourth Gospel. This is a completely subjective argument, ignoring the fact that any great man will appear differently to different people. The judgment of the church throughout the centuries has been that Jesus was large enough to inspire both portraits. To put the same point another way, we have no reason for holding that the first three Evangelists tell us all there is to know about Jesus. There is no contradiction. John simply brings out other aspects of Jesus’ life and teachings.<\/p>\n<p>While we cannot prove beyond all doubt that John the apostle was the author, we can say that there is more reason for holding to this view than to any other.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>It has been usual for conservatives and liberals alike to date this writing in the last decade of the first century or early in the second. Some liberal scholars have put it well into the second century, but this is not common, and it is remarkable that there has been such a considerable measure of agreement.<\/p>\n<p>It is said that this Gospel is dependent on the Synoptics, which means that it must be dated sometime after them. But this argument has been widely abandoned in recent times. There is so much in John that is without parallel in the other three Gospels, and conversely so much in the other three that John might have used had he known it, that it is very difficult indeed to hold that this writer had any of the other Gospels before him when he wrote, or even that he had read them. Such resemblances as there are seem better explained by common use of oral tradition.<\/p>\n<p>It is also argued that there is a very developed theology in John and that we must allow time for its development. Granted, the theology of this Gospel is profound, but this does not require that we must wait for it until the end of the first century. The theology of the Letter to the Romans is also profound, and there is no reason for dating that writing later than the 50s. On the ground of development, then, there is no reason for putting John later than Romans. Development is a slippery argument at best, for it usually takes place at uneven rates, and we have no means of knowing how fast it took place in the area where the author lived.<\/p>\n<p>Other arguments for a late date are no more conclusive. For example, it is urged that the ecclesiastical system presupposed by the Gospel is too late for the time of the apostle John, and that the sacramental system of chapters 3 and 6 must have taken time to develop. But John does not mention any sacrament. It is true that many scholars think these chapters refer to baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but the fact is that John mentions neither.<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising in view of the way the traditional arguments have crumbled away that many in recent times are arguing that John must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70. If it were later, why does not John have some reference to it? Some of his language appears to be earlier. In 5:2 he says there “is” (not “was”) a pool called Bethesda. And he often refers to the Twelve as Jesus’ disciples, or “his” disciples, or the like. In later times Christians usually said “the” disciples, for they saw no need to say whose the disciples were. But in the early days, when Christians were in contact with rabbis (each of whom had his disciples), it was important to show that Jesus’ disciples were in mind. It is important also that John makes no reference to any of the synoptic Gospels. The simplest explanation is that he had not seen them. They were not yet widely circulated.<\/p>\n<p>None of this enables us to date this Gospel with precision. But the weight of evidence points to an early date (before <span>AD<\/span> 70).<\/p>\n<p>The author was John the apostle, a Jew. However, the writing gives evidence of contact with Greek thought, for example, in the reference to Christ as “the Word” in chapter 1 and the translation of words like “rabbi” (1:38). It is almost universally held that such considerations compel us to see the work as originating in a center of Greek culture, and Ephesus has traditionally been favored. Before the end of the second century we have Irenaeus writing that John published the Gospel during his residence at Ephesus.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to similarities between John and the Odes of Solomon, which they think came from Syria. As there are also some resemblances in the language of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, this is held to show that John was written in Syria, probably at Antioch. Others again think that Egypt was the place, and they support this by pointing out that the oldest fragment of a manuscript of this Gospel was found there. There is no real evidence, and we are left with probabilities. There is much to be said for accepting the evidence of Irenaeus and seeing Ephesus as the place of origin, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>There is no real indication of the intended destination. From 20:31 we learn that the book was written that the readers might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and that by believing they might have life. The Gospel, then, has an evangelistic aim. But it is also possible that “believe” means “keep on believing”—“go on in faith,” rather than “begin to believe.” That is to say, the book may have been meant from the beginning to build people up in the faith. Probably we should not distinguish between these aims too sharply. Both may well be in mind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Several possible backgrounds to the Gospel have been suggested. The Greek interest is obvious, and this writing has sometimes been called the Gospel of the Hellenists. The suggestion is that we should look to Greek writings, perhaps the works of the philosophers or Philo of Alexandria, to find the right background against which to understand what John has written. This approach may be seen in the work of Rudolf Bultmann, who thought specifically of Gnosticism. Indeed, for Bultmann one of the sources of this Gospel was a discourse source that he thought was taken from non-Christian Gnosticism. Not many have been prepared to follow Bultmann, but a number of recent commentators have discerned some form of Gnosticism as the backdrop to John.<\/p>\n<p>While such views are put forward seriously, there are some substantial objections. One is that, despite the confident assertions of some scholars, Gnosticism has never been shown to be earlier than Christianity. In the form in which it comes before us in history, it is a Christian heresy, and of course, the Christian faith must appear before a Christian heresy is possible. Another objection is that there is a basic difference between the two systems. Gnosticism is concerned with knowledge (the very word is derived from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>,<\/em> “knowledge”). Its “redeemer” is one who comes from heaven with knowledge. But John does not subscribe to the view that man is saved by knowledge. The Redeemer comes to take away the sin of the world (1:29). Gnosticism tells people that life is an upward struggle; Christianity tells of a Savior who came down to raise them up. It is not easy to see any form of Gnosticism as the essential background to Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Much more significant is John’s Semitic background. Especially important here is the OT, accepted as sacred Scripture by Jew and Christian alike. It lies constantly behind John’s statements, and it must be studied carefully if John is to be understood. It is plain that John knew and loved the Septuagint, the translation into Greek of the Hebrew OT. Again and again, the Septuagint can be shown to lie behind what John says.<\/p>\n<p>In modern times important discoveries have been made at Qumran, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. Among the scrolls unearthed in the caves of this area are several that have affinities with John. Indeed, one of the interesting facts about the scrolls is that they have more parallels with John than with any other part of the NT, a fact difficult to explain if John was written late and at a distance from Palestine. The resemblances to the Qumran writings must be viewed with care, for there is often a linguistic resemblance where the thinking is quite different. For example, both use the unusual expression “the Spirit of truth.” But where John means one of the persons of the Trinity, the scrolls speak of “a spirit of truth” and “a spirit of error” striving in the souls of people. The connection is real, but John is clearly not dependent on the scrolls for his thinking. The contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they afford additional evidence that this Gospel is basically Palestinian and must be understood against a background of first-century Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Other backgrounds have been suggested, such as the Hermetic literature. This is a group of writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus (“Hermes Thrice-greatest”), a designation of the Egyptian god Thoth. There are indeed some points of contact with John, but they are few in comparison with those of writings rooted in Palestine. It is difficult to take such suggestions seriously. John is essentially Palestinian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The writer told us that Jesus did many “signs” (or miracles) that he had not recorded, but “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life” (Jn 20:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). John wrote to show that Jesus is the Messiah. But he did not do this simply with a view to conveying interesting information. He wanted his readers to see this knowledge as a challenge to faith; when they believe, they will have life. John sought to bring men and women to Christ; he had an evangelistic aim. That does not exhaust what he was trying to do, for his words have meaning for believers. It is important that believers have a right knowledge of Jesus and that they continue to believe.<\/p>\n<p>The main theological teaching of this Gospel, then, is that God has sent his Messiah, Jesus. He is the very Son of God, and he comes to bring life (3:16). Though Jesus told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, this is not often said so specifically. The avoidance of the term might well be because of the political overtones it had acquired among the Jews at large. They looked for a Messiah who would fight the Romans. He would defeat them and set up a mighty world empire with its capital in Jerusalem. Jesus was not aiming at anything like that, and it was important that he avoid the kind of language that would give that impression. But though the conventional messianic terminology is avoided, John left no doubt that Jesus was God’s chosen one. Again and again he depicted Jesus as fulfilling messianic functions. For example, in the long discourse in chapter 6 we see Jesus as the bread from heaven, fulfilling the expectation that when Messiah came, he would renew the manna; and in the giving of sight to the blind man (ch 9) we have another messianic function (cf. Is 35:5).<\/p>\n<p>With this greatness of Jesus, John also combined teaching about his lowliness. A continuing, though unobtrusive, strand of Johannine teaching is that Jesus depends on the Father for everything. Apart from the Father, Jesus said, he could do nothing (Jn 5:30). His very food is to do the Father’s will (4:34). He lives through the Father (6:57). It is the Father who gives him his disciples (6:37, 44; 17:6). It is the Father who bears witness to him (5:32, 37). John insists that Jesus is in no sense independent of the Father. In the mission of Jesus, John sees the working out of the purpose of the Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue and Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>John begins with a prologue (1:1-18) that is unlike anything in any of the other Gospels. In it he refers to Jesus as “the Word,” a term that has points of contact with both Greek and Hebrew thinking. As John uses it, it conveys the thought that Jesus is the expression of the mind of the Father. John speaks of the Word as God (1:1), sees him as active in creation (1:3-5), goes on to the witness borne to him by John the Baptist (1:6-8), speaks of the coming of the Word into the world (1:9-14), and finishes with a section on the greatness of the Word (1:15-18). In this prologue he briefly introduces some of the great themes that will be developed throughout the Gospel. It is a majestic introduction to the whole.<\/p>\n<p>Next we have the beginnings of Jesus’ public ministry (1:19-51). Jesus’ work was preceded by that of John the Baptist, and the Evangelist tells us first about the kind of witness that the Baptist gave to Jesus. Witness is one of his important concepts, and witness is all that John the Baptist does in this Gospel. From this witness we move to the way the first disciples came to Jesus. We learn something of how Andrew and Peter came to know the Lord. We read also of Philip and Nathanael, of whom we learn little or nothing in the other Gospels.<\/p>\n<h5>The Signs and Discourses (2:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The public ministry of Jesus is described in a very distinctive way in this Gospel. John has a long section (chs 2–12) in which he tells of a number of miracles Jesus did, interweaving into his account a series of discourses. Sometimes these are addresses given to groups of people, and sometimes they are talks with individuals. Some scholars call this section of the Gospel the Book of Signs, thus emphasizing the prominent place given to seven miracles. For John they are not simply wonders. They are meaningful; in the literal sense of the term they are <em>sign<\/em>ificant.<\/p>\n<p>The first of them is the turning of the water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee (2:1-11). The water in question is connected with Jewish rites of purification (v 6), and the story is surely to teach us that Jesus transforms life. He changes the water of the law into the wine of the gospel. As a result of this “sign,” his disciples believed in him (v 11). John went on to tell how Jesus went up to Jerusalem and drove the traders out of the temple. They were selling animals for sacrifice and changing money. But their business was being done in the Court of the Gentiles, the only place in the temple where a Gentile could come to meditate and pray.<\/p>\n<p>The first discourse is on the new birth (3:1-21). Jesus talked with Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, about the necessity for radical renewal if one is to enter the kingdom. Jesus was speaking of God’s regenerating activity, not some human reformation. Following this, John records a dispute between some of John’s disciples with a Jew on the subject of purification. This opens the way for a section that shows the superiority of Jesus over John the Baptist—by the Baptist’s own confession (3:22-36).<\/p>\n<p>The second discourse is really a long conversation Jesus had with the woman of Samaria, whom he met by a well (4:1-42). It turns on “the water of life,” a term that is not fully explained in this chapter but which we later find points to the life-giving Spirit (7:38-39). This leads to the story of the second sign, the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54), notable for the fact that Jesus healed at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>The third sign is the healing of the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (5:1-18). This man had spent many years waiting for healing at the moving of the water. Jesus told him to get up and walk, and he did. Because it was done on a Sabbath, the Pharisees objected. This leads to Jesus’ third discourse, that on the divine Son (5:19-47). Here the closeness of the relationship of Jesus to the Father is stressed, and his place in the judgment is brought out. There is emphasis also on the variety of witness who encountered Jesus, which shows how reasonable it is to accept him as God’s own Son.<\/p>\n<p>John’s fourth sign is the one miracle (apart from the resurrection) found in all four Gospels: the feeding of the 5,000 (6:1-15). It is followed by Jesus’ walking on water (vv 16-21), which seems to be meant as the fifth sign (though some scholars think not; if they are right, there are only six signs). Then comes the fourth discourse, the great sermon on the bread of life (vv 22-59). Jesus is this bread, which he gives to all men and women who believe in him. There are references to eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv 50-58), which point to his death. Some have seen in them a reference to Communion, but it is hard to see why Jesus should refer in this way to an as-yet-nonexistent sacrament. Moreover, much the same effect is attributed in the same discourse to believing (vv 35, 47). It seems best to understand Jesus as meaning that people must believe in him as the one who would die for them in order for them to have life.<\/p>\n<p>There is a section detailing Peter’s affirmation of loyalty in the face of some who drifted away from the Master (6:67-71). Then we come to the fifth discourse, on the life-giving Spirit (7:1-52). John has an important explanatory point of his own when he tells us that at the time the Spirit had not been given because Jesus had not yet been glorified (v 39). The fullness of the Spirit depends on the completion of the work of Christ in his death and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The sixth discourse tells of the light of the world (8:12-59). This aspect of Jesus’ person and ministry is dramatically brought out in the sixth sign, the healing of the man born blind (ch 9). It is a lively narrative, as the healed man conducts a spirited defense against the Pharisees who belittled Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most beautiful of all the illustrations of Jesus’ relations to his people is that on which he dwells in the seventh discourse, where he speaks of himself as the good shepherd (ch 10). There is the obvious truth that sheep depend entirely on their shepherd, but Jesus says something else. Whereas earthly shepherds live to meet the needs of their sheep, Jesus laid down his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The final sign is the raising of Lazarus (11:1-44), a man who had been dead for four days. The story graphically brings out Jesus’ power over death and his readiness to confer the gift of life. Jesus speaks of himself as “the resurrection and the life” (v 25); death cannot defeat him. He brings life to the dead, to the spiritually dead as well as to physically dead Lazarus. John goes on to note the reaction to this miracle: some believed, but some opposed Jesus (vv 45-57). He includes a notable saying of Caiaphas, the high priest, that one man should die for the people (vv 50-52). Caiaphas was speaking as a cynical politician (better one dead, however innocent, than the whole nation be troubled). But John saw in the words the deeper meaning that Jesus’ death would bring salvation to many.<\/p>\n<p>John rounds off his account of the ministry with the story of the anointing of Jesus by a woman in Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the coming of some Greeks to Jesus, and his final summary of what he had taught (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Last Supper<\/h5>\n<p>The account of what went on in the upper room on the night before the Crucifixion is the fullest of all the four Gospels. Curiously, John says nothing about the institution of Communion, a fact that has never been satisfactorily explained. But he tells us how Jesus washed the feet of the disciples (13:1-17), an action splendidly exemplifying the spirit of lowly service so soon to be shown on the cross. Then comes the prophecy of the betrayal, an action that set in motion the events that would lead to the cross (vv 18-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the long discourse that follows, Jesus dealt with some questions posed by his followers and went on to teach them some important truths, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). He develops the thought that he is the true vine, the disciples being vitally joined to him as branches to the vine. It is important for the branches to remain in the vine if they are to have life (15:1-16). Then come some words about suffering that would be of help to them in times of persecution (vv 17-25). Jesus goes on to speak about the Holy Spirit (15:26–16:15). This is a very important passage, for it contains much more about the Spirit than we find elsewhere in Jesus’ words. Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete,” a title not easy to understand. It is in origin a legal term, and at least we can say that it indicates that the Spirit brings friendship, encouragement, and help. Jesus went on to speak of his approaching departure from the disciples and to prepare them for the trying time ahead (16:16-33). This part of the Gospel concludes with Jesus’ great High Priestly prayer. He prayed for the disciples to be one, as he commended them to the care of the heavenly Father (ch 17).<\/p>\n<h5>The Cross and Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, he went forward to meet them and they fell to the ground (18:1-11). He gave himself over to them; they did not take him over. At the outset of his passion narrative, John was making the point that Jesus is sovereign. He was not being defeated by the march of events but was sovereignly doing the will of the Father. John is the only one to tell us that Jesus was taken before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, the reigning high priest (18:12-14, 19-24). He tells also of Peter’s three denials of Jesus (vv 15-27). He did not spend much time on the Jewish trial, but he was much more explicit than the other Evangelists in his account of the Roman trial. Clearly, he had some special knowledge of what went on before Pilate. He presents a magnificent picture of Jesus talking with Pilate about kingship—the Son of God discussing with the representative of Caesar the meaning of sovereignty (vv 33-40).<\/p>\n<p>In his account of the Crucifixion John has a number of touches of his own, notably the way Jesus commended Mary to the care of the beloved disciple (19:26-27), the fact that the cry Jesus uttered as he died was “It is finished” (v 30), and the piercing of his side by a soldier’s spear (vv 31-37).<\/p>\n<p>John proceeds to the narrative of the burial (vv 38-42) and of the empty tomb (20:1-10). He speaks of appearances of the risen Lord to Mary Magdalene (vv 11-18), and to the disciples—both without (vv 19-23) and with Thomas (vv 24-29).<\/p>\n<p>The final chapter, an epilogue, tells of a miraculous catch of fish (21:1-14) and goes on to the moving account of Peter’s threefold declaration of love to Jesus and his restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOHN, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>The fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospels. (See discussion above on John, the Apostle.)<\/p>\n\n<p>The Gospel appears to have been written by one who knew the Jews and the Palestine of Jesus’ day well. He was familiar with Jewish messianic expectations (e.g., Jn 1:20-21; 4:25; 7:40-42; 12:34). He knew of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9) and the contempt the Pharisees had for “the people of the land” (7:49). He knew of the importance attached to the religious schools (v 15). He knew the way the Sabbath was observed and was aware of the provision that the obligation to circumcise on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath regulations (vv 22-23). Throughout the Gospel he moved with certainty in the vast range of Jewish ideas and customs.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same with topography. The writer mentioned many places, and his place-names all seem to be used correctly. He referred to Cana, a village not mentioned in any earlier literature known to us, which means that the reference almost certainly came from someone who actually knew the place. He located Bethany with some precision as about 15 stadia from Jerusalem (about 2 miles, or 3.2 kilometers, 11:18). He had several references to places in or near Jerusalem, such as Bethesda (5:2), Siloam (9:7), and the Kidron Valley (18:1). Of course, this does not rule out some contemporary of John’s, but it makes it difficult to think of the author as a much later individual writing at a distance from Palestine. The evidence as we have it indicates that the writer was a Jew in the Palestine of Jesus’ day.<\/p>\n<p>To many careful readers, it seems that the Gospel bears the stamp of an eyewitness. For example, Jesus was teaching “in the treasury” (8:20). Nothing is made of the point; the incident could easily have been told without it. It looks like a reminiscence of someone who sees the scene in his mind’s eye as he writes. The fact that the house was filled with fragrance when the woman broke the perfume jar (12:3) does not materially affect the account but is the kind of detail that one who was there would remember. The author noted that the loaves used in the feeding of the multitude were barley loaves (6:9) and that Jesus’ tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top to bottom (19:23). He told us that the branches with which Jesus was greeted were palm branches (12:13), and that it was night when Judas went out (13:30). Such touches are found throughout the Gospel, and it seems unjustified to treat them as no more than an attempt to create verisimilitude. They seem much more like indications that the author was writing about events in which he had himself taken part.<\/p>\n<p>The early church accepted Johannine authorship without question. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all see the apostle as the author. The first to quote this Gospel by name was Theophilus of Antioch, about <span>AD<\/span> 180.<\/p>\n<p>Those who object to Johannine authorship emphasize the differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics. The argument is that if Jesus was anything like the Christ portrayed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he could not be like the Christ of the fourth Gospel. This is a completely subjective argument, ignoring the fact that any great man will appear differently to different people. The judgment of the church throughout the centuries has been that Jesus was large enough to inspire both portraits. To put the same point another way, we have no reason for holding that the first three Evangelists tell us all there is to know about Jesus. There is no contradiction. John simply brings out other aspects of Jesus’ life and teachings.<\/p>\n<p>While we cannot prove beyond all doubt that John the apostle was the author, we can say that there is more reason for holding to this view than to any other.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>It has been usual for conservatives and liberals alike to date this writing in the last decade of the first century or early in the second. Some liberal scholars have put it well into the second century, but this is not common, and it is remarkable that there has been such a considerable measure of agreement.<\/p>\n<p>It is said that this Gospel is dependent on the Synoptics, which means that it must be dated sometime after them. But this argument has been widely abandoned in recent times. There is so much in John that is without parallel in the other three Gospels, and conversely so much in the other three that John might have used had he known it, that it is very difficult indeed to hold that this writer had any of the other Gospels before him when he wrote, or even that he had read them. Such resemblances as there are seem better explained by common use of oral tradition.<\/p>\n<p>It is also argued that there is a very developed theology in John and that we must allow time for its development. Granted, the theology of this Gospel is profound, but this does not require that we must wait for it until the end of the first century. The theology of the Letter to the Romans is also profound, and there is no reason for dating that writing later than the 50s. On the ground of development, then, there is no reason for putting John later than Romans. Development is a slippery argument at best, for it usually takes place at uneven rates, and we have no means of knowing how fast it took place in the area where the author lived.<\/p>\n<p>Other arguments for a late date are no more conclusive. For example, it is urged that the ecclesiastical system presupposed by the Gospel is too late for the time of the apostle John, and that the sacramental system of chapters 3 and 6 must have taken time to develop. But John does not mention any sacrament. It is true that many scholars think these chapters refer to baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but the fact is that John mentions neither.<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising in view of the way the traditional arguments have crumbled away that many in recent times are arguing that John must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70. If it were later, why does not John have some reference to it? Some of his language appears to be earlier. In 5:2 he says there “is” (not “was”) a pool called Bethesda. And he often refers to the Twelve as Jesus’ disciples, or “his” disciples, or the like. In later times Christians usually said “the” disciples, for they saw no need to say whose the disciples were. But in the early days, when Christians were in contact with rabbis (each of whom had his disciples), it was important to show that Jesus’ disciples were in mind. It is important also that John makes no reference to any of the synoptic Gospels. The simplest explanation is that he had not seen them. They were not yet widely circulated.<\/p>\n<p>None of this enables us to date this Gospel with precision. But the weight of evidence points to an early date (before <span>AD<\/span> 70).<\/p>\n<p>The author was John the apostle, a Jew. However, the writing gives evidence of contact with Greek thought, for example, in the reference to Christ as “the Word” in chapter 1 and the translation of words like “rabbi” (1:38). It is almost universally held that such considerations compel us to see the work as originating in a center of Greek culture, and Ephesus has traditionally been favored. Before the end of the second century we have Irenaeus writing that John published the Gospel during his residence at Ephesus.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to similarities between John and the Odes of Solomon, which they think came from Syria. As there are also some resemblances in the language of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, this is held to show that John was written in Syria, probably at Antioch. Others again think that Egypt was the place, and they support this by pointing out that the oldest fragment of a manuscript of this Gospel was found there. There is no real evidence, and we are left with probabilities. There is much to be said for accepting the evidence of Irenaeus and seeing Ephesus as the place of origin, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>There is no real indication of the intended destination. From 20:31 we learn that the book was written that the readers might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and that by believing they might have life. The Gospel, then, has an evangelistic aim. But it is also possible that “believe” means “keep on believing”—“go on in faith,” rather than “begin to believe.” That is to say, the book may have been meant from the beginning to build people up in the faith. Probably we should not distinguish between these aims too sharply. Both may well be in mind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Several possible backgrounds to the Gospel have been suggested. The Greek interest is obvious, and this writing has sometimes been called the Gospel of the Hellenists. The suggestion is that we should look to Greek writings, perhaps the works of the philosophers or Philo of Alexandria, to find the right background against which to understand what John has written. This approach may be seen in the work of Rudolf Bultmann, who thought specifically of Gnosticism. Indeed, for Bultmann one of the sources of this Gospel was a discourse source that he thought was taken from non-Christian Gnosticism. Not many have been prepared to follow Bultmann, but a number of recent commentators have discerned some form of Gnosticism as the backdrop to John.<\/p>\n<p>While such views are put forward seriously, there are some substantial objections. One is that, despite the confident assertions of some scholars, Gnosticism has never been shown to be earlier than Christianity. In the form in which it comes before us in history, it is a Christian heresy, and of course, the Christian faith must appear before a Christian heresy is possible. Another objection is that there is a basic difference between the two systems. Gnosticism is concerned with knowledge (the very word is derived from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>,<\/em> “knowledge”). Its “redeemer” is one who comes from heaven with knowledge. But John does not subscribe to the view that man is saved by knowledge. The Redeemer comes to take away the sin of the world (1:29). Gnosticism tells people that life is an upward struggle; Christianity tells of a Savior who came down to raise them up. It is not easy to see any form of Gnosticism as the essential background to Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Much more significant is John’s Semitic background. Especially important here is the OT, accepted as sacred Scripture by Jew and Christian alike. It lies constantly behind John’s statements, and it must be studied carefully if John is to be understood. It is plain that John knew and loved the Septuagint, the translation into Greek of the Hebrew OT. Again and again, the Septuagint can be shown to lie behind what John says.<\/p>\n<p>In modern times important discoveries have been made at Qumran, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. Among the scrolls unearthed in the caves of this area are several that have affinities with John. Indeed, one of the interesting facts about the scrolls is that they have more parallels with John than with any other part of the NT, a fact difficult to explain if John was written late and at a distance from Palestine. The resemblances to the Qumran writings must be viewed with care, for there is often a linguistic resemblance where the thinking is quite different. For example, both use the unusual expression “the Spirit of truth.” But where John means one of the persons of the Trinity, the scrolls speak of “a spirit of truth” and “a spirit of error” striving in the souls of people. The connection is real, but John is clearly not dependent on the scrolls for his thinking. The contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they afford additional evidence that this Gospel is basically Palestinian and must be understood against a background of first-century Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Other backgrounds have been suggested, such as the Hermetic literature. This is a group of writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus (“Hermes Thrice-greatest”), a designation of the Egyptian god Thoth. There are indeed some points of contact with John, but they are few in comparison with those of writings rooted in Palestine. It is difficult to take such suggestions seriously. John is essentially Palestinian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The writer told us that Jesus did many “signs” (or miracles) that he had not recorded, but “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life” (Jn 20:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). John wrote to show that Jesus is the Messiah. But he did not do this simply with a view to conveying interesting information. He wanted his readers to see this knowledge as a challenge to faith; when they believe, they will have life. John sought to bring men and women to Christ; he had an evangelistic aim. That does not exhaust what he was trying to do, for his words have meaning for believers. It is important that believers have a right knowledge of Jesus and that they continue to believe.<\/p>\n<p>The main theological teaching of this Gospel, then, is that God has sent his Messiah, Jesus. He is the very Son of God, and he comes to bring life (3:16). Though Jesus told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, this is not often said so specifically. The avoidance of the term might well be because of the political overtones it had acquired among the Jews at large. They looked for a Messiah who would fight the Romans. He would defeat them and set up a mighty world empire with its capital in Jerusalem. Jesus was not aiming at anything like that, and it was important that he avoid the kind of language that would give that impression. But though the conventional messianic terminology is avoided, John left no doubt that Jesus was God’s chosen one. Again and again he depicted Jesus as fulfilling messianic functions. For example, in the long discourse in chapter 6 we see Jesus as the bread from heaven, fulfilling the expectation that when Messiah came, he would renew the manna; and in the giving of sight to the blind man (ch 9) we have another messianic function (cf. Is 35:5).<\/p>\n<p>With this greatness of Jesus, John also combined teaching about his lowliness. A continuing, though unobtrusive, strand of Johannine teaching is that Jesus depends on the Father for everything. Apart from the Father, Jesus said, he could do nothing (Jn 5:30). His very food is to do the Father’s will (4:34). He lives through the Father (6:57). It is the Father who gives him his disciples (6:37, 44; 17:6). It is the Father who bears witness to him (5:32, 37). John insists that Jesus is in no sense independent of the Father. In the mission of Jesus, John sees the working out of the purpose of the Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue and Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>John begins with a prologue (1:1-18) that is unlike anything in any of the other Gospels. In it he refers to Jesus as “the Word,” a term that has points of contact with both Greek and Hebrew thinking. As John uses it, it conveys the thought that Jesus is the expression of the mind of the Father. John speaks of the Word as God (1:1), sees him as active in creation (1:3-5), goes on to the witness borne to him by John the Baptist (1:6-8), speaks of the coming of the Word into the world (1:9-14), and finishes with a section on the greatness of the Word (1:15-18). In this prologue he briefly introduces some of the great themes that will be developed throughout the Gospel. It is a majestic introduction to the whole.<\/p>\n<p>Next we have the beginnings of Jesus’ public ministry (1:19-51). Jesus’ work was preceded by that of John the Baptist, and the Evangelist tells us first about the kind of witness that the Baptist gave to Jesus. Witness is one of his important concepts, and witness is all that John the Baptist does in this Gospel. From this witness we move to the way the first disciples came to Jesus. We learn something of how Andrew and Peter came to know the Lord. We read also of Philip and Nathanael, of whom we learn little or nothing in the other Gospels.<\/p>\n<h5>The Signs and Discourses (2:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The public ministry of Jesus is described in a very distinctive way in this Gospel. John has a long section (chs 2–12) in which he tells of a number of miracles Jesus did, interweaving into his account a series of discourses. Sometimes these are addresses given to groups of people, and sometimes they are talks with individuals. Some scholars call this section of the Gospel the Book of Signs, thus emphasizing the prominent place given to seven miracles. For John they are not simply wonders. They are meaningful; in the literal sense of the term they are <em>sign<\/em>ificant.<\/p>\n<p>The first of them is the turning of the water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee (2:1-11). The water in question is connected with Jewish rites of purification (v 6), and the story is surely to teach us that Jesus transforms life. He changes the water of the law into the wine of the gospel. As a result of this “sign,” his disciples believed in him (v 11). John went on to tell how Jesus went up to Jerusalem and drove the traders out of the temple. They were selling animals for sacrifice and changing money. But their business was being done in the Court of the Gentiles, the only place in the temple where a Gentile could come to meditate and pray.<\/p>\n<p>The first discourse is on the new birth (3:1-21). Jesus talked with Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, about the necessity for radical renewal if one is to enter the kingdom. Jesus was speaking of God’s regenerating activity, not some human reformation. Following this, John records a dispute between some of John’s disciples with a Jew on the subject of purification. This opens the way for a section that shows the superiority of Jesus over John the Baptist—by the Baptist’s own confession (3:22-36).<\/p>\n<p>The second discourse is really a long conversation Jesus had with the woman of Samaria, whom he met by a well (4:1-42). It turns on “the water of life,” a term that is not fully explained in this chapter but which we later find points to the life-giving Spirit (7:38-39). This leads to the story of the second sign, the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54), notable for the fact that Jesus healed at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>The third sign is the healing of the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (5:1-18). This man had spent many years waiting for healing at the moving of the water. Jesus told him to get up and walk, and he did. Because it was done on a Sabbath, the Pharisees objected. This leads to Jesus’ third discourse, that on the divine Son (5:19-47). Here the closeness of the relationship of Jesus to the Father is stressed, and his place in the judgment is brought out. There is emphasis also on the variety of witness who encountered Jesus, which shows how reasonable it is to accept him as God’s own Son.<\/p>\n<p>John’s fourth sign is the one miracle (apart from the resurrection) found in all four Gospels: the feeding of the 5,000 (6:1-15). It is followed by Jesus’ walking on water (vv 16-21), which seems to be meant as the fifth sign (though some scholars think not; if they are right, there are only six signs). Then comes the fourth discourse, the great sermon on the bread of life (vv 22-59). Jesus is this bread, which he gives to all men and women who believe in him. There are references to eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv 50-58), which point to his death. Some have seen in them a reference to Communion, but it is hard to see why Jesus should refer in this way to an as-yet-nonexistent sacrament. Moreover, much the same effect is attributed in the same discourse to believing (vv 35, 47). It seems best to understand Jesus as meaning that people must believe in him as the one who would die for them in order for them to have life.<\/p>\n<p>There is a section detailing Peter’s affirmation of loyalty in the face of some who drifted away from the Master (6:67-71). Then we come to the fifth discourse, on the life-giving Spirit (7:1-52). John has an important explanatory point of his own when he tells us that at the time the Spirit had not been given because Jesus had not yet been glorified (v 39). The fullness of the Spirit depends on the completion of the work of Christ in his death and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The sixth discourse tells of the light of the world (8:12-59). This aspect of Jesus’ person and ministry is dramatically brought out in the sixth sign, the healing of the man born blind (ch 9). It is a lively narrative, as the healed man conducts a spirited defense against the Pharisees who belittled Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most beautiful of all the illustrations of Jesus’ relations to his people is that on which he dwells in the seventh discourse, where he speaks of himself as the good shepherd (ch 10). There is the obvious truth that sheep depend entirely on their shepherd, but Jesus says something else. Whereas earthly shepherds live to meet the needs of their sheep, Jesus laid down his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The final sign is the raising of Lazarus (11:1-44), a man who had been dead for four days. The story graphically brings out Jesus’ power over death and his readiness to confer the gift of life. Jesus speaks of himself as “the resurrection and the life” (v 25); death cannot defeat him. He brings life to the dead, to the spiritually dead as well as to physically dead Lazarus. John goes on to note the reaction to this miracle: some believed, but some opposed Jesus (vv 45-57). He includes a notable saying of Caiaphas, the high priest, that one man should die for the people (vv 50-52). Caiaphas was speaking as a cynical politician (better one dead, however innocent, than the whole nation be troubled). But John saw in the words the deeper meaning that Jesus’ death would bring salvation to many.<\/p>\n<p>John rounds off his account of the ministry with the story of the anointing of Jesus by a woman in Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the coming of some Greeks to Jesus, and his final summary of what he had taught (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Last Supper<\/h5>\n<p>The account of what went on in the upper room on the night before the Crucifixion is the fullest of all the four Gospels. Curiously, John says nothing about the institution of Communion, a fact that has never been satisfactorily explained. But he tells us how Jesus washed the feet of the disciples (13:1-17), an action splendidly exemplifying the spirit of lowly service so soon to be shown on the cross. Then comes the prophecy of the betrayal, an action that set in motion the events that would lead to the cross (vv 18-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the long discourse that follows, Jesus dealt with some questions posed by his followers and went on to teach them some important truths, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). He develops the thought that he is the true vine, the disciples being vitally joined to him as branches to the vine. It is important for the branches to remain in the vine if they are to have life (15:1-16). Then come some words about suffering that would be of help to them in times of persecution (vv 17-25). Jesus goes on to speak about the Holy Spirit (15:26–16:15). This is a very important passage, for it contains much more about the Spirit than we find elsewhere in Jesus’ words. Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete,” a title not easy to understand. It is in origin a legal term, and at least we can say that it indicates that the Spirit brings friendship, encouragement, and help. Jesus went on to speak of his approaching departure from the disciples and to prepare them for the trying time ahead (16:16-33). This part of the Gospel concludes with Jesus’ great High Priestly prayer. He prayed for the disciples to be one, as he commended them to the care of the heavenly Father (ch 17).<\/p>\n<h5>The Cross and Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, he went forward to meet them and they fell to the ground (18:1-11). He gave himself over to them; they did not take him over. At the outset of his passion narrative, John was making the point that Jesus is sovereign. He was not being defeated by the march of events but was sovereignly doing the will of the Father. John is the only one to tell us that Jesus was taken before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, the reigning high priest (18:12-14, 19-24). He tells also of Peter’s three denials of Jesus (vv 15-27). He did not spend much time on the Jewish trial, but he was much more explicit than the other Evangelists in his account of the Roman trial. Clearly, he had some special knowledge of what went on before Pilate. He presents a magnificent picture of Jesus talking with Pilate about kingship—the Son of God discussing with the representative of Caesar the meaning of sovereignty (vv 33-40).<\/p>\n<p>In his account of the Crucifixion John has a number of touches of his own, notably the way Jesus commended Mary to the care of the beloved disciple (19:26-27), the fact that the cry Jesus uttered as he died was “It is finished” (v 30), and the piercing of his side by a soldier’s spear (vv 31-37).<\/p>\n<p>John proceeds to the narrative of the burial (vv 38-42) and of the empty tomb (20:1-10). He speaks of appearances of the risen Lord to Mary Magdalene (vv 11-18), and to the disciples—both without (vv 19-23) and with Thomas (vv 24-29).<\/p>\n<p>The final chapter, an epilogue, tells of a miraculous catch of fish (21:1-14) and goes on to the moving account of Peter’s threefold declaration of love to Jesus and his restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOHN, Gospel of The fourth Gospel. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospe...","summary_en":"JOHN, Gospel of The fourth Gospel. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospe...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":31574,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Prophecy","title_en":"Prophecy","content_ro":"<h3>PROPHECY<\/h3>\n<p>Term, along with its English cognates (“prophet,” “to prophesy,” “prophetism,” and “prophetic”), derived from a group of Greek words that, in secular Greek, mean “speak forth,” “proclaim,” “announce.” In biblical Greek, however, these terms always carry the connotation of speaking, proclaiming, or announcing something under the influence of spiritual inspiration.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Prophecy in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Types of Old Testament Prophets<\/p>\n<p>• The Message of the Prophets<\/p>\n<p>• Prophecy in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• The Role of the Christian Prophet<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProphecyintheOldTestament\">Prophecy in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>One of the clearest and most significant statements on the nature of prophetic inspiration in the OT is found in Numbers 12:6-8: “The <span>Lord<\/span> said to them, ‘Now listen to me! Even with prophets, I the <span>Lord<\/span> communicate by visions and dreams. But that is not how I communicate with my servant Moses. He is entrusted with my entire house. I speak to him face to face, directly and not in riddles! He sees the <span>Lord<\/span> as he is’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Several important insights into the nature of prophetic inspiration are found in this passage: (1) The prophetic gift of Moses was unique in that he alone received revelations directly from God. (2) Ordinarily, prophetic revelation was received through the medium of a dream or a vision. (3) The meaning of prophetic revelation is not always completely clear; prophecy is sometimes ambiguous.<\/p>\n<p>Further insight into the nature of prophetic revelation is found in Deuteronomy 18:18: “I [God] will raise up for them a prophet like you [Moses] from among their brethren; and I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him” (<span>rsv<\/span>). While this passage is of interest because Jesus was identified as “the prophet like Moses” who came in fulfillment of this prediction (Acts 3:22; 7:37), the more immediate historical reference is to the succession of prophets that guided Israel from Joshua to Malachi. The phrase “I will put my words in his mouth” refers to the process of divine inspiration and is reminiscent of the common OT prophetic formula “the word of the Lord came to [such and such a prophet]” (for examples, see 1 Sm 15:10; 2 Sm 24:11; 1 Kgs 19:9; Jon 1:1; Hg 1:1; 2:1, 20; Zec 7:1, 8; 8:1). A true prophet is one who speaks (or repeats) all that God has told him.<\/p>\n<h5>Modes of Prophetic Inspiration<\/h5>\n<p>Dreams were a commonly recognized mode of inspiration throughout the ancient world, though they were more highly regarded in Greece than in ancient Israel. Revelatory dreams in the Bible fall into two major categories: (1) dreams whose meaning is self-evident, and (2) symbolic dreams that usually require the expertise of an interpreter of dreams. Both types normally involve both visual and auditory elements. In those dreams whose meaning is self-evident, normally a supernatural being (God or an angel) appears to the dreamer and speaks to him or her in a straightforward manner.<\/p>\n<p>More frequently, revelatory dreams have symbolic elements that require interpretation. The two great dream interpreters of the OT are Joseph and Daniel; the latter is clearly a prophet. The two symbolic dreams that Joseph himself dreamed (Gn 37:5-11) had sufficiently self-evident meaning so that his brothers and father were able to interpret them immediately. More complex were the dreams of the butler and baker (40:1-19) and of Pharaoh (41:1-36), which Joseph was able to interpret with the help of God. Similarly, Daniel was enabled to interpret the dreams of Nebuchadnezzar (Dn 2:25-45; 4:4-27). The skill in interpreting such dreams was attributed by both Joseph and Daniel to God (Gn 40:8; 41:16, 25; Dn 2:27-30; cf. 4:9). While dreams are used almost interchangeably with visions in referring to modes of prophetic inspiration (Jl 2:28), dreams do not occupy a significant part in the prophetic revelations of any of the OT prophets, with the exception of Daniel.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic modes of prophetic inspiration was the vision (Nm 12:6; 24:4, 16; Hos 12:10). The revelatory visions experienced by the prophets were not limited to visual phenomena alone but also included the auditory dimension as well. In Isaiah 1:1, the author describes his entire prophetic book as a “vision”: “These visions concerning Judah and Jerusalem came to Isaiah son of Amoz during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah—all kings of Judah” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Yet in the very next verse, Isaiah says, “Hear, O heavens! Listen, O earth! This is what the <span>Lord<\/span> says.” Again, in Amos 1:1, “The <em>words<\/em> of Amos, who was among the shepherds of Tekoa, which he <em>saw<\/em> concerning Israel” (<span>rsv<\/span>, emphasis added).<\/p>\n<h5>Manifestations of Prophetic Inspiration<\/h5>\n<p>All prophecy, whether biblical or not, presupposes that the prophet either possessed or was possessed by a personal supernatural power. The external behavioral manifestations of this possession can exhibit great variety.<\/p>\n<p>The prophetic phenomenon generally designated “ecstatic” prophecy appears to have existed in Canaan prior to the arrival of the Hebrew tribes in the 13th century <span>BC<\/span>. The first reference to ecstatic prophecy in Israel occurs in 1 Samuel 10:5-13 (11th century <span>BC<\/span>), and it persisted at least till the sixth century <span>BC<\/span> (Jer 29:26).<\/p>\n<p>The ecstatic prophet achieves a trancelike state by self-induced means. The most common devices used to achieve a state of ecstasy were musical instruments, such as the harp, tambourine, flute, and lyre (1 Sm 10:5). Among the prophets of Baal, self-flagellation was another means of inducing ecstasy (1 Kgs 18:28-29).<\/p>\n<p>This kind of prophetic ecstasy was usually practiced by groups of prophets (1 Sm 10:5), and such ecstasy was contagious. When Saul met a band of such prophets, the Spirit of God came upon him and he, too, began to prophesy (vv 10-13), a phenomenon that occurred repeatedly to various messengers sent by Saul on a later occasion (19:20-22). At that time Saul again prophesied, and his ecstatic behavior is described in 1 Samuel 19:24. When Elisha was asked to prophesy for King Jehoram of Israel, he first requested a minstrel. When the minstrel played, the power of the Lord came upon him (2 Kgs 3:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TypesofOldTestamentProphets\">Types of Old Testament Prophets<\/p>\n<p>There are two basic types of prophetic commission in the OT. One type is that of a narrative call by God to a particular individual whose objections to the call are gradually overcome in a dialogue between himself and God. The classic example of this type of prophetic commission is found in Jeremiah 1:4-8:<\/p>\n<p>The <span>Lord<\/span> gave me a message. He said, “I knew you before I formed you in your mother’s womb. Before you were born I set you apart and appointed you as my spokesman to the world.”<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>“O Sovereign <span>Lord<\/span>,” I said, “I can’t speak for you! I’m too young!”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>“Don’t say that,” the <span>Lord<\/span> replied, “for you must go wherever I send you and say whatever I tell you. And don’t be afraid of the people, for I will be with you and take care of you. I, the <span>Lord<\/span>, have spoken!” (<span>nlt<\/span>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Similar prophetic commissions including such dialogues are associated with the calls of Moses (Ex 3:1–4:17) and Gideon (Jgs 6:11-17).<\/p>\n<p>The second major form of prophetic commission is the “throne vision.” An outstanding example is Isaiah 6:1-8:<\/p>\n<p>In the year King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord. He was sitting on a lofty throne, and the train of his robe filled the Temple. . . .<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Then I said, “My destruction is sealed, for I am a sinful man and a member of a sinful race. Yet I have seen the King, the <span>Lord<\/span> Almighty!”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>Then one of the seraphim flew over to the altar, and he picked up a burning coal with a pair of tongs. He touched my lips with it and said, “See, this coal has touched your lips. Now your guilt is removed, and your sins are forgiven.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>Then I heard the Lord asking, “Whom should I send as a messenger to my people? Who will go for us?”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>And I said, “Lord, I’ll go! Send me.” (<span>nlt<\/span>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Here we have an account of the visionary presence of a prophet in the heavenly council; in this case, however, the prophet participates in the deliberations and thereby receives a prophetic commission. Though few prophets have left accounts of their divine commissions, most of them appear to have been conscious of having been “sent” by God (Is 48:16; Hos 8:1; Am 7:14-15). According to Jeremiah, false prophets did not receive such divine commissions (Jer 23:21, 32; 28:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMessageoftheProphets\">The Message of the Prophets<\/p>\n<h5>The Form of the Message<\/h5>\n<p>The most common introductory formula for prophetic oracles in the OT is the phrase “Thus says the Lord,” which occurs hundreds of times in prophetic contexts. This formula clearly implies that the pronouncement so introduced is not the word of the prophet who utters the oracle but of the God of Israel who delivered his word to his prophet. The use of this formula also reiterates the prophet’s sense of divine commission. In oracles introduced in this manner, God speaks in the first person. In fact, virtually all Israelite prophetic utterance is formulated as the direct speech of the God of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets used many literary forms in which to express their oracles. Two of the more widely used forms of prophetic speech are the judgment speech and the oracle of salvation. The judgment speech is composed of at least two central elements: the speech of rebuke or invective, and the pronouncement of judgment (see 2 Kgs 1:3-4). The second common prophetic speech form is the oracle of salvation (see Is 41:8-13). Other fixed forms of prophetic speech include the prophecy of salvation (43:14-21), the proclamation of salvation (41:17-20; 42:14-17; 43:16-21; 49:7-12), and the woe oracle (Is 5:8-10; 10:1-4; Am 5:18-24; 6:1-7; Mi 2:1-5).<\/p>\n<h5>The Content of the Message<\/h5>\n<p>The common adage that OT prophets were not “foretellers” but “forthtellers” is not strictly correct. All of the prophets predict the future. Such prediction, however, is based not on human curiosity of what the future will hold but rather is rooted in the future consequences of past or present violations of the covenant, or on a future act of deliverance that will provide hope for a discouraged people. Most of the prophetic speeches that have been preserved in the OT were originally delivered as public proclamations or sermons. Most of these prophetic proclamations were evoked by the iniquity and apostasy of Israel. Hosea and Jeremiah condemned Israel because she had broken the covenant (Jer 11:2-3; Hos 8:1).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets are frequently associated with social justice and social reform, and these elements were unquestionably an important dimension of their message. Amos denounced the rich who afflicted the poor (Am 2:6-8; 4:1; 5:11; 8:4-6). He railed against sexual immorality (2:6-8) and against those who take bribes (5:12). Hosea provided a list of prevalent vices, including lying, killing, stealing, adultery, and idolatry (Hos 4:2). Idolatry was a particular target for his denunciations (8:5; 11:2). The background for such heated denunciations of Israel’s behavior is God’s unquenchable love for Israel (Is 43:4; Jer 31:3; Hos 3:1; 11:1-4; 14:4; Mal 1:2), which is inseparable from his election of Israel (Is 43:1; Jer 33:24; Ez 20:5; Hos 3).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets were concerned not only with the transgressions of Israel and the historical judgment that would inevitably follow but also with the achievement of a final future time of bliss. The message of many of the prophets is thoroughly eschatological (i.e., pertaining to the end times). One such eschatological concept is that of the Day of the Lord. The concept of the Day of the Lord first appears in Amos, where the emphasis lies on the disaster that will befall Israel on that day. Amos’s emphasis on disaster notwithstanding, the Day of the Lord is a conception that had both salvific as well as judgmental overtones for Israel. While the disaster that will occur in the Day of the Lord can be viewed in terms of a literal historical fulfillment in the tragic events of 722 <span>BC<\/span> (the fall of Samaria) and 586 <span>BC<\/span> (the fall of Judah), there are nevertheless features of these predictions that transcend historical fulfillment and reach toward eschatological fulfillment.<\/p>\n<p>Since the Israelite conception of “salvation” was largely temporal in its dimensions, it included such blessings as length of life, fruitfulness of the womb and field, peace and victory over one’s enemies, the abundance of water, and so on. In harmony with this conception of salvation, the future age is conceived in precisely those terms, as in Amos 9:13-15.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets pictured a time when David himself, or someone very much like him, would return and inaugurate a golden era reminiscent of the great Davidic and Solomonic period. The covenant of God with David was not a conditional covenant but rather one that was absolutely inviolable (2 Sm 7:4-17; Ps 89; Jer 33:19-22), and it was with this knowledge that the prophets could look forward confidently to a restoration of David’s throne (Jer 17:24-26; 23:5-6; 33:14-15).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProphecyintheNewTestament\">Prophecy in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to the few self-proclaimed prophets of the intertestamental period, early Christianity began with a flurry of prophetic activity that lasted well into the second century <span>AD<\/span>. Jesus, his disciples and followers, and the early Christians were convinced that the times in which they lived were times in which OT prophecy was being fulfilled (Mk 1:14-15; Acts 2:16-21; Rom 16:25-27; 1 Cor 10:11). Yet this era was not only one of fulfillment but also one of the renewal of the prophetic gift.<\/p>\n<h5>John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist is remembered in the NT primarily as the forerunner of Jesus whose coming was predicted by Malachi (Mal 4:5-6). Yet, in his own right, John proclaimed the imminent judgment of God with a flair of denunciation and rebuke reminiscent of the OT prophets. John’s costume, consisting of a hairy cloak and a leather girdle (Mk 1:6), was reminiscent of the typical garb of OT prophets (1 Kgs 19:19; 2 Kgs 1:8; 2:13-14; Zec 13:4). John was regarded as a prophet by people everywhere (Mt 14:5; 17:10-13; Mk 9:11-13; 11:32; Lk 1:76; 7:26). Luke reports, in a style similar to the OT prophetic narratives, that “the word of God came to John” (Lk 3:2). Two short prophetic speeches have been preserved in Matthew 3:7-10 (cf. Lk 3:7-9) and Mark 1:7-8 (cf. Mt 3:11-12; Lk 3:15-18). In the first speech, John denounced those of his generation who had transgressed the covenant law and exhorted them to change their manner of life. In the second speech, John predicted the coming of the Mighty One, Jesus (Mt 3:11; Mk 1:7; Lk 3:16; Jn 1:15, 27, 30; Acts 13:25). John’s style, however, was not precisely that of the OT prophets. His pronouncements were made on his own authority; never did he use formulas such as “thus says the Lord,” or present his prophetic utterances as if they were speeches made by God. Yet, in spite of these differences, John is appropriately regarded as the last representative of the OT prophetic tradition (Mt 11:13; Lk 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus of Nazareth<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus was popularly regarded as a prophet (Mt 16:14; 21:10-11; Mk 6:14-15; 8:28; Lk 7:16, 39; 9:8, 19; Jn 6:14; 7:40, 52). This assessment was based as much on the mighty deeds Jesus performed as on his prophetic speeches and predictions. Though Jesus nowhere claimed prophetic status directly, that claim is implicit in Mark 6:4: “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown” (cf. Mt 13:57; Lk 4:24). It is implicit as well in Luke 13:33: “Yes, today, tomorrow, and the next day I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be killed except in Jerusalem!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). In Acts, Jesus is regarded as “the prophet like Moses” predicted in Deuteronomy 18:18 (Acts 3:22; 7:37). Matthew presents Jesus as the New Moses, but he does not particularly emphasize his prophetic role. John, however, like Luke, emphasizes Jesus’ role as the prophet (Jn 4:19; 6:14-15; 7:40).<\/p>\n<p>While the Gospels and Acts reflect the notion that Jesus was a prophet, they also emphasize the fact that he was much more than a prophet. Nevertheless, the notion of prophetism was sufficiently important in early Judaism that Jesus’ recognition as a prophet is very significant. There are 12 solid reasons for regarding Jesus as a prophet in the OT tradition: (1) The sovereign authority of Jesus’ teaching (Mk 1:27), a feature underlined by his use of the introductory formula “(Amen) I say to you,” which is reminiscent of the formula “thus says the Lord” used by the OT prophets. (2) The poetic character of many of Jesus’ sayings is unlike contemporary rabbinic teaching but is similar to the poetic rhetoric of the OT prophets. (3) Jesus experienced visions (Lk 10:18) like the ancient prophets. (4) Jesus, like the prophets, made many predictions (Mt 23:38; Mk 13:2; 14:58; Lk 13:35; etc.). (5) Like the OT prophets, Jesus performed symbolic acts (such as the cleansing of the temple, the entry into Jerusalem, and the Last Supper). (6) Jesus, like the prophets, when necessary, rejected the formal observance of religious ritual and emphasized the moral and spiritual dimensions of obedience to God. (7) Jesus announced the imminent arrival of the kingdom of God—an eschatological proclamation similar to those made by the prophets. (8) Like the OT prophets, Jesus functioned as a preacher of repentance. (9) Jesus, like many of the prophets, was conscious of a special calling of God (Mt 15:24; Mk 8:31; 9:37; 14:36; Lk 4:18-26). (10) Jesus, like the prophets, received divine revelation through intimate communion with God (Mt 11:27; Lk 10:22). (11) Like the prophets, Jesus represented God; to obey him was to obey God, to reject him was to reject God (Mk 9:37; cf. Ez 33:30-33). (12) Like the prophets, Jesus was conscious of a mission to all Israel (Mt 15:24; 19:28; Lk 22:30).<\/p>\n<p>Among the many prophetic predictions of Jesus are the following:<\/p>\n<p>1. Predictions of the imminent arrival of the kingdom of God (Mt 10:7-8, 23; 23:39; Mk 1:15; 9:1; 13:28-29)<\/p>\n<li>2. Predictions of the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple (Mt 23:37-39; 24:2; 26:61; 27:40; Mk 13:2; 14:58; 15:29; Lk 13:34-35; 21:6; Jn 2:19-21)<\/li>\n<li>3. Predictions of the coming of the Son of Man (Mt 10:23, 32-33; 12:40; 13:40-41; 16:27; 24:27, 37-39; Mk 8:38; 13:26-27; 14:62; Lk 9:26; 11:30; 12:8-9; 17:24, 26)<\/li>\n<li>4. Predictions of the end of the age. The longest prophetic section in the Gospels is the eschatological discourse of Jesus in Mark 13:1-32 (cf. Mt 24:1-36; Lk 21:5-33), in which a number of predictions concerning the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age are woven into a lengthy discourse to the disciples.<\/li>\n<h5>Prophecy as a Gift for the Believers<\/h5>\n<p>The beginning of prophetic activity in early Christianity, according to Acts, coincided with the outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon the earliest Christians on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-21). Peter’s sermon on the Day of Pentecost indicates that the outpouring of the Spirit fulfilled Joel’s prophecy (Acts 2:4, 17-21; cf. Jl 2:28-32). Further, since the Spirit had been poured out upon all early Christians (that Spirit being a Spirit of prophecy), all are actual or potential prophets.<\/p>\n<p>According to 1 Corinthians 12:28 (see also Rom 12:6; Eph 4:11), God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, and third teachers. The names of several early Christian prophets have been preserved. These include Agabus (Acts 11:27-28; 21:10-11); Judas and Silas (15:32); Barnabas, Simeon Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen, and Paul (13:1); and the four virgin daughters of Philip the evangelist (21:8-9). John, the author of Revelation, was certainly a prophet (Rv 1:3; 22:9, 18), though he never directly assumed that title.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRoleoftheChristianProphet\">The Role of the Christian Prophet<\/p>\n<p>Christian prophets were leaders in early Christian communities (1 Cor 12:28; Eph 4:11), who exercised their gift in church gatherings (Acts 13:1-3; 11:27-28; 1 Cor 12–14; Rv 1:10). Since the Spirit of God was particularly active in Christian worship, prophecy was a major means whereby God communicated with his people. Prophets, like apostles and teachers, did not hold offices in local communities like bishops, elders, and deacons. Rather, they were chosen, not by individual congregations, but by divine commission and so were honored and accepted in all local communities.<\/p>\n<p>Early Christian prophets were both itinerant and settled, though itinerant prophets seem to have been more prevalent in Syria-Palestine and Asia Minor than in the European churches.<\/p>\n<h5>The Function of Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>According to Paul, the central purpose of prophecy (as of all other spiritual gifts) is that of building up or edifying the church. According to 1 Corinthians 14:3, “one who prophesies is helping others grow in the Lord, encouraging and comforting them” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Again, in 1 Corinthians 14:4, Paul states that the “one who speaks a word of prophecy strengthens the entire church.” Paul discussed the subject of spiritual gifts, particularly tongues speaking and prophecy, because the Corinthians had placed an excessive emphasis on speaking in tongues. Paul did not object to speaking in tongues (1 Cor 14:18, 39), but he did point out that, since it was generally incomprehensible, the church could not be edified by it. Prophecy, which consisted of comprehensible speech inspired by the Spirit, contributed to the mutual edification, encouragement, and consolation of all present (1 Cor 14:20-25, 39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Content of Christian Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>We know only a little about the content of prophecies uttered in the first-century church. Prophetic utterance occasionally provided divine guidance in making important decisions in early Christianity. Through a prophetic utterance, Paul and Barnabas were selected for a particular mission (Acts 13:1-3; cf. 1 Tm 1:18; 4:14). Probably through prophetic utterance, Paul and Timothy were forbidden to preach the gospel in Asia (Acts 16:6), and they were similarly forbidden by the Spirit of Jesus to go into Bithynia (v 7). Perhaps the most frequent use of prophecy is the prediction of the future. Agabus predicted a universal famine (11:28) and the imminent arrest of Paul (21:11). Other prophets had also predicted his impending imprisonment (20:23). The prophecies contained in the Revelation of John are all oriented toward the future events that will gradually unfold in the last days. Yet the purpose of John’s elaborate prophecy is not to satisfy the curiosity of his audience but rather to comfort and encourage them in the midst of persecution.<\/p>\n<h5>The Form of Christian Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>Unlike the prophets of the OT, Christian prophets did not always present their message in the form of a direct speech from God or Jesus. There are few, if any, formal indicators of the presence of prophetic speech in early Christian literature. The book of Revelation is one notable exception.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dreams; Oracle; Promise; Prophet, Prophetess; Prophets, False; Visions.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PROPHECY<\/h3>\n<p>Term, along with its English cognates (“prophet,” “to prophesy,” “prophetism,” and “prophetic”), derived from a group of Greek words that, in secular Greek, mean “speak forth,” “proclaim,” “announce.” In biblical Greek, however, these terms always carry the connotation of speaking, proclaiming, or announcing something under the influence of spiritual inspiration.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Prophecy in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Types of Old Testament Prophets<\/p>\n<p>• The Message of the Prophets<\/p>\n<p>• Prophecy in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• The Role of the Christian Prophet<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProphecyintheOldTestament\">Prophecy in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>One of the clearest and most significant statements on the nature of prophetic inspiration in the OT is found in Numbers 12:6-8: “The <span>Lord<\/span> said to them, ‘Now listen to me! Even with prophets, I the <span>Lord<\/span> communicate by visions and dreams. But that is not how I communicate with my servant Moses. He is entrusted with my entire house. I speak to him face to face, directly and not in riddles! He sees the <span>Lord<\/span> as he is’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Several important insights into the nature of prophetic inspiration are found in this passage: (1) The prophetic gift of Moses was unique in that he alone received revelations directly from God. (2) Ordinarily, prophetic revelation was received through the medium of a dream or a vision. (3) The meaning of prophetic revelation is not always completely clear; prophecy is sometimes ambiguous.<\/p>\n<p>Further insight into the nature of prophetic revelation is found in Deuteronomy 18:18: “I [God] will raise up for them a prophet like you [Moses] from among their brethren; and I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him” (<span>rsv<\/span>). While this passage is of interest because Jesus was identified as “the prophet like Moses” who came in fulfillment of this prediction (Acts 3:22; 7:37), the more immediate historical reference is to the succession of prophets that guided Israel from Joshua to Malachi. The phrase “I will put my words in his mouth” refers to the process of divine inspiration and is reminiscent of the common OT prophetic formula “the word of the Lord came to [such and such a prophet]” (for examples, see 1 Sm 15:10; 2 Sm 24:11; 1 Kgs 19:9; Jon 1:1; Hg 1:1; 2:1, 20; Zec 7:1, 8; 8:1). A true prophet is one who speaks (or repeats) all that God has told him.<\/p>\n<h5>Modes of Prophetic Inspiration<\/h5>\n<p>Dreams were a commonly recognized mode of inspiration throughout the ancient world, though they were more highly regarded in Greece than in ancient Israel. Revelatory dreams in the Bible fall into two major categories: (1) dreams whose meaning is self-evident, and (2) symbolic dreams that usually require the expertise of an interpreter of dreams. Both types normally involve both visual and auditory elements. In those dreams whose meaning is self-evident, normally a supernatural being (God or an angel) appears to the dreamer and speaks to him or her in a straightforward manner.<\/p>\n<p>More frequently, revelatory dreams have symbolic elements that require interpretation. The two great dream interpreters of the OT are Joseph and Daniel; the latter is clearly a prophet. The two symbolic dreams that Joseph himself dreamed (Gn 37:5-11) had sufficiently self-evident meaning so that his brothers and father were able to interpret them immediately. More complex were the dreams of the butler and baker (40:1-19) and of Pharaoh (41:1-36), which Joseph was able to interpret with the help of God. Similarly, Daniel was enabled to interpret the dreams of Nebuchadnezzar (Dn 2:25-45; 4:4-27). The skill in interpreting such dreams was attributed by both Joseph and Daniel to God (Gn 40:8; 41:16, 25; Dn 2:27-30; cf. 4:9). While dreams are used almost interchangeably with visions in referring to modes of prophetic inspiration (Jl 2:28), dreams do not occupy a significant part in the prophetic revelations of any of the OT prophets, with the exception of Daniel.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic modes of prophetic inspiration was the vision (Nm 12:6; 24:4, 16; Hos 12:10). The revelatory visions experienced by the prophets were not limited to visual phenomena alone but also included the auditory dimension as well. In Isaiah 1:1, the author describes his entire prophetic book as a “vision”: “These visions concerning Judah and Jerusalem came to Isaiah son of Amoz during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah—all kings of Judah” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Yet in the very next verse, Isaiah says, “Hear, O heavens! Listen, O earth! This is what the <span>Lord<\/span> says.” Again, in Amos 1:1, “The <em>words<\/em> of Amos, who was among the shepherds of Tekoa, which he <em>saw<\/em> concerning Israel” (<span>rsv<\/span>, emphasis added).<\/p>\n<h5>Manifestations of Prophetic Inspiration<\/h5>\n<p>All prophecy, whether biblical or not, presupposes that the prophet either possessed or was possessed by a personal supernatural power. The external behavioral manifestations of this possession can exhibit great variety.<\/p>\n<p>The prophetic phenomenon generally designated “ecstatic” prophecy appears to have existed in Canaan prior to the arrival of the Hebrew tribes in the 13th century <span>BC<\/span>. The first reference to ecstatic prophecy in Israel occurs in 1 Samuel 10:5-13 (11th century <span>BC<\/span>), and it persisted at least till the sixth century <span>BC<\/span> (Jer 29:26).<\/p>\n<p>The ecstatic prophet achieves a trancelike state by self-induced means. The most common devices used to achieve a state of ecstasy were musical instruments, such as the harp, tambourine, flute, and lyre (1 Sm 10:5). Among the prophets of Baal, self-flagellation was another means of inducing ecstasy (1 Kgs 18:28-29).<\/p>\n<p>This kind of prophetic ecstasy was usually practiced by groups of prophets (1 Sm 10:5), and such ecstasy was contagious. When Saul met a band of such prophets, the Spirit of God came upon him and he, too, began to prophesy (vv 10-13), a phenomenon that occurred repeatedly to various messengers sent by Saul on a later occasion (19:20-22). At that time Saul again prophesied, and his ecstatic behavior is described in 1 Samuel 19:24. When Elisha was asked to prophesy for King Jehoram of Israel, he first requested a minstrel. When the minstrel played, the power of the Lord came upon him (2 Kgs 3:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TypesofOldTestamentProphets\">Types of Old Testament Prophets<\/p>\n<p>There are two basic types of prophetic commission in the OT. One type is that of a narrative call by God to a particular individual whose objections to the call are gradually overcome in a dialogue between himself and God. The classic example of this type of prophetic commission is found in Jeremiah 1:4-8:<\/p>\n<p>The <span>Lord<\/span> gave me a message. He said, “I knew you before I formed you in your mother’s womb. Before you were born I set you apart and appointed you as my spokesman to the world.”<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>“O Sovereign <span>Lord<\/span>,” I said, “I can’t speak for you! I’m too young!”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>“Don’t say that,” the <span>Lord<\/span> replied, “for you must go wherever I send you and say whatever I tell you. And don’t be afraid of the people, for I will be with you and take care of you. I, the <span>Lord<\/span>, have spoken!” (<span>nlt<\/span>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Similar prophetic commissions including such dialogues are associated with the calls of Moses (Ex 3:1–4:17) and Gideon (Jgs 6:11-17).<\/p>\n<p>The second major form of prophetic commission is the “throne vision.” An outstanding example is Isaiah 6:1-8:<\/p>\n<p>In the year King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord. He was sitting on a lofty throne, and the train of his robe filled the Temple. . . .<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Then I said, “My destruction is sealed, for I am a sinful man and a member of a sinful race. Yet I have seen the King, the <span>Lord<\/span> Almighty!”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>Then one of the seraphim flew over to the altar, and he picked up a burning coal with a pair of tongs. He touched my lips with it and said, “See, this coal has touched your lips. Now your guilt is removed, and your sins are forgiven.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>Then I heard the Lord asking, “Whom should I send as a messenger to my people? Who will go for us?”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>And I said, “Lord, I’ll go! Send me.” (<span>nlt<\/span>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Here we have an account of the visionary presence of a prophet in the heavenly council; in this case, however, the prophet participates in the deliberations and thereby receives a prophetic commission. Though few prophets have left accounts of their divine commissions, most of them appear to have been conscious of having been “sent” by God (Is 48:16; Hos 8:1; Am 7:14-15). According to Jeremiah, false prophets did not receive such divine commissions (Jer 23:21, 32; 28:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMessageoftheProphets\">The Message of the Prophets<\/p>\n<h5>The Form of the Message<\/h5>\n<p>The most common introductory formula for prophetic oracles in the OT is the phrase “Thus says the Lord,” which occurs hundreds of times in prophetic contexts. This formula clearly implies that the pronouncement so introduced is not the word of the prophet who utters the oracle but of the God of Israel who delivered his word to his prophet. The use of this formula also reiterates the prophet’s sense of divine commission. In oracles introduced in this manner, God speaks in the first person. In fact, virtually all Israelite prophetic utterance is formulated as the direct speech of the God of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets used many literary forms in which to express their oracles. Two of the more widely used forms of prophetic speech are the judgment speech and the oracle of salvation. The judgment speech is composed of at least two central elements: the speech of rebuke or invective, and the pronouncement of judgment (see 2 Kgs 1:3-4). The second common prophetic speech form is the oracle of salvation (see Is 41:8-13). Other fixed forms of prophetic speech include the prophecy of salvation (43:14-21), the proclamation of salvation (41:17-20; 42:14-17; 43:16-21; 49:7-12), and the woe oracle (Is 5:8-10; 10:1-4; Am 5:18-24; 6:1-7; Mi 2:1-5).<\/p>\n<h5>The Content of the Message<\/h5>\n<p>The common adage that OT prophets were not “foretellers” but “forthtellers” is not strictly correct. All of the prophets predict the future. Such prediction, however, is based not on human curiosity of what the future will hold but rather is rooted in the future consequences of past or present violations of the covenant, or on a future act of deliverance that will provide hope for a discouraged people. Most of the prophetic speeches that have been preserved in the OT were originally delivered as public proclamations or sermons. Most of these prophetic proclamations were evoked by the iniquity and apostasy of Israel. Hosea and Jeremiah condemned Israel because she had broken the covenant (Jer 11:2-3; Hos 8:1).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets are frequently associated with social justice and social reform, and these elements were unquestionably an important dimension of their message. Amos denounced the rich who afflicted the poor (Am 2:6-8; 4:1; 5:11; 8:4-6). He railed against sexual immorality (2:6-8) and against those who take bribes (5:12). Hosea provided a list of prevalent vices, including lying, killing, stealing, adultery, and idolatry (Hos 4:2). Idolatry was a particular target for his denunciations (8:5; 11:2). The background for such heated denunciations of Israel’s behavior is God’s unquenchable love for Israel (Is 43:4; Jer 31:3; Hos 3:1; 11:1-4; 14:4; Mal 1:2), which is inseparable from his election of Israel (Is 43:1; Jer 33:24; Ez 20:5; Hos 3).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets were concerned not only with the transgressions of Israel and the historical judgment that would inevitably follow but also with the achievement of a final future time of bliss. The message of many of the prophets is thoroughly eschatological (i.e., pertaining to the end times). One such eschatological concept is that of the Day of the Lord. The concept of the Day of the Lord first appears in Amos, where the emphasis lies on the disaster that will befall Israel on that day. Amos’s emphasis on disaster notwithstanding, the Day of the Lord is a conception that had both salvific as well as judgmental overtones for Israel. While the disaster that will occur in the Day of the Lord can be viewed in terms of a literal historical fulfillment in the tragic events of 722 <span>BC<\/span> (the fall of Samaria) and 586 <span>BC<\/span> (the fall of Judah), there are nevertheless features of these predictions that transcend historical fulfillment and reach toward eschatological fulfillment.<\/p>\n<p>Since the Israelite conception of “salvation” was largely temporal in its dimensions, it included such blessings as length of life, fruitfulness of the womb and field, peace and victory over one’s enemies, the abundance of water, and so on. In harmony with this conception of salvation, the future age is conceived in precisely those terms, as in Amos 9:13-15.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets pictured a time when David himself, or someone very much like him, would return and inaugurate a golden era reminiscent of the great Davidic and Solomonic period. The covenant of God with David was not a conditional covenant but rather one that was absolutely inviolable (2 Sm 7:4-17; Ps 89; Jer 33:19-22), and it was with this knowledge that the prophets could look forward confidently to a restoration of David’s throne (Jer 17:24-26; 23:5-6; 33:14-15).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProphecyintheNewTestament\">Prophecy in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to the few self-proclaimed prophets of the intertestamental period, early Christianity began with a flurry of prophetic activity that lasted well into the second century <span>AD<\/span>. Jesus, his disciples and followers, and the early Christians were convinced that the times in which they lived were times in which OT prophecy was being fulfilled (Mk 1:14-15; Acts 2:16-21; Rom 16:25-27; 1 Cor 10:11). Yet this era was not only one of fulfillment but also one of the renewal of the prophetic gift.<\/p>\n<h5>John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist is remembered in the NT primarily as the forerunner of Jesus whose coming was predicted by Malachi (Mal 4:5-6). Yet, in his own right, John proclaimed the imminent judgment of God with a flair of denunciation and rebuke reminiscent of the OT prophets. John’s costume, consisting of a hairy cloak and a leather girdle (Mk 1:6), was reminiscent of the typical garb of OT prophets (1 Kgs 19:19; 2 Kgs 1:8; 2:13-14; Zec 13:4). John was regarded as a prophet by people everywhere (Mt 14:5; 17:10-13; Mk 9:11-13; 11:32; Lk 1:76; 7:26). Luke reports, in a style similar to the OT prophetic narratives, that “the word of God came to John” (Lk 3:2). Two short prophetic speeches have been preserved in Matthew 3:7-10 (cf. Lk 3:7-9) and Mark 1:7-8 (cf. Mt 3:11-12; Lk 3:15-18). In the first speech, John denounced those of his generation who had transgressed the covenant law and exhorted them to change their manner of life. In the second speech, John predicted the coming of the Mighty One, Jesus (Mt 3:11; Mk 1:7; Lk 3:16; Jn 1:15, 27, 30; Acts 13:25). John’s style, however, was not precisely that of the OT prophets. His pronouncements were made on his own authority; never did he use formulas such as “thus says the Lord,” or present his prophetic utterances as if they were speeches made by God. Yet, in spite of these differences, John is appropriately regarded as the last representative of the OT prophetic tradition (Mt 11:13; Lk 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus of Nazareth<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus was popularly regarded as a prophet (Mt 16:14; 21:10-11; Mk 6:14-15; 8:28; Lk 7:16, 39; 9:8, 19; Jn 6:14; 7:40, 52). This assessment was based as much on the mighty deeds Jesus performed as on his prophetic speeches and predictions. Though Jesus nowhere claimed prophetic status directly, that claim is implicit in Mark 6:4: “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown” (cf. Mt 13:57; Lk 4:24). It is implicit as well in Luke 13:33: “Yes, today, tomorrow, and the next day I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be killed except in Jerusalem!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). In Acts, Jesus is regarded as “the prophet like Moses” predicted in Deuteronomy 18:18 (Acts 3:22; 7:37). Matthew presents Jesus as the New Moses, but he does not particularly emphasize his prophetic role. John, however, like Luke, emphasizes Jesus’ role as the prophet (Jn 4:19; 6:14-15; 7:40).<\/p>\n<p>While the Gospels and Acts reflect the notion that Jesus was a prophet, they also emphasize the fact that he was much more than a prophet. Nevertheless, the notion of prophetism was sufficiently important in early Judaism that Jesus’ recognition as a prophet is very significant. There are 12 solid reasons for regarding Jesus as a prophet in the OT tradition: (1) The sovereign authority of Jesus’ teaching (Mk 1:27), a feature underlined by his use of the introductory formula “(Amen) I say to you,” which is reminiscent of the formula “thus says the Lord” used by the OT prophets. (2) The poetic character of many of Jesus’ sayings is unlike contemporary rabbinic teaching but is similar to the poetic rhetoric of the OT prophets. (3) Jesus experienced visions (Lk 10:18) like the ancient prophets. (4) Jesus, like the prophets, made many predictions (Mt 23:38; Mk 13:2; 14:58; Lk 13:35; etc.). (5) Like the OT prophets, Jesus performed symbolic acts (such as the cleansing of the temple, the entry into Jerusalem, and the Last Supper). (6) Jesus, like the prophets, when necessary, rejected the formal observance of religious ritual and emphasized the moral and spiritual dimensions of obedience to God. (7) Jesus announced the imminent arrival of the kingdom of God—an eschatological proclamation similar to those made by the prophets. (8) Like the OT prophets, Jesus functioned as a preacher of repentance. (9) Jesus, like many of the prophets, was conscious of a special calling of God (Mt 15:24; Mk 8:31; 9:37; 14:36; Lk 4:18-26). (10) Jesus, like the prophets, received divine revelation through intimate communion with God (Mt 11:27; Lk 10:22). (11) Like the prophets, Jesus represented God; to obey him was to obey God, to reject him was to reject God (Mk 9:37; cf. Ez 33:30-33). (12) Like the prophets, Jesus was conscious of a mission to all Israel (Mt 15:24; 19:28; Lk 22:30).<\/p>\n<p>Among the many prophetic predictions of Jesus are the following:<\/p>\n<p>1. Predictions of the imminent arrival of the kingdom of God (Mt 10:7-8, 23; 23:39; Mk 1:15; 9:1; 13:28-29)<\/p>\n<li>2. Predictions of the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple (Mt 23:37-39; 24:2; 26:61; 27:40; Mk 13:2; 14:58; 15:29; Lk 13:34-35; 21:6; Jn 2:19-21)<\/li>\n<li>3. Predictions of the coming of the Son of Man (Mt 10:23, 32-33; 12:40; 13:40-41; 16:27; 24:27, 37-39; Mk 8:38; 13:26-27; 14:62; Lk 9:26; 11:30; 12:8-9; 17:24, 26)<\/li>\n<li>4. Predictions of the end of the age. The longest prophetic section in the Gospels is the eschatological discourse of Jesus in Mark 13:1-32 (cf. Mt 24:1-36; Lk 21:5-33), in which a number of predictions concerning the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age are woven into a lengthy discourse to the disciples.<\/li>\n<h5>Prophecy as a Gift for the Believers<\/h5>\n<p>The beginning of prophetic activity in early Christianity, according to Acts, coincided with the outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon the earliest Christians on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-21). Peter’s sermon on the Day of Pentecost indicates that the outpouring of the Spirit fulfilled Joel’s prophecy (Acts 2:4, 17-21; cf. Jl 2:28-32). Further, since the Spirit had been poured out upon all early Christians (that Spirit being a Spirit of prophecy), all are actual or potential prophets.<\/p>\n<p>According to 1 Corinthians 12:28 (see also Rom 12:6; Eph 4:11), God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, and third teachers. The names of several early Christian prophets have been preserved. These include Agabus (Acts 11:27-28; 21:10-11); Judas and Silas (15:32); Barnabas, Simeon Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen, and Paul (13:1); and the four virgin daughters of Philip the evangelist (21:8-9). John, the author of Revelation, was certainly a prophet (Rv 1:3; 22:9, 18), though he never directly assumed that title.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRoleoftheChristianProphet\">The Role of the Christian Prophet<\/p>\n<p>Christian prophets were leaders in early Christian communities (1 Cor 12:28; Eph 4:11), who exercised their gift in church gatherings (Acts 13:1-3; 11:27-28; 1 Cor 12–14; Rv 1:10). Since the Spirit of God was particularly active in Christian worship, prophecy was a major means whereby God communicated with his people. Prophets, like apostles and teachers, did not hold offices in local communities like bishops, elders, and deacons. Rather, they were chosen, not by individual congregations, but by divine commission and so were honored and accepted in all local communities.<\/p>\n<p>Early Christian prophets were both itinerant and settled, though itinerant prophets seem to have been more prevalent in Syria-Palestine and Asia Minor than in the European churches.<\/p>\n<h5>The Function of Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>According to Paul, the central purpose of prophecy (as of all other spiritual gifts) is that of building up or edifying the church. According to 1 Corinthians 14:3, “one who prophesies is helping others grow in the Lord, encouraging and comforting them” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Again, in 1 Corinthians 14:4, Paul states that the “one who speaks a word of prophecy strengthens the entire church.” Paul discussed the subject of spiritual gifts, particularly tongues speaking and prophecy, because the Corinthians had placed an excessive emphasis on speaking in tongues. Paul did not object to speaking in tongues (1 Cor 14:18, 39), but he did point out that, since it was generally incomprehensible, the church could not be edified by it. Prophecy, which consisted of comprehensible speech inspired by the Spirit, contributed to the mutual edification, encouragement, and consolation of all present (1 Cor 14:20-25, 39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Content of Christian Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>We know only a little about the content of prophecies uttered in the first-century church. Prophetic utterance occasionally provided divine guidance in making important decisions in early Christianity. Through a prophetic utterance, Paul and Barnabas were selected for a particular mission (Acts 13:1-3; cf. 1 Tm 1:18; 4:14). Probably through prophetic utterance, Paul and Timothy were forbidden to preach the gospel in Asia (Acts 16:6), and they were similarly forbidden by the Spirit of Jesus to go into Bithynia (v 7). Perhaps the most frequent use of prophecy is the prediction of the future. Agabus predicted a universal famine (11:28) and the imminent arrest of Paul (21:11). Other prophets had also predicted his impending imprisonment (20:23). The prophecies contained in the Revelation of John are all oriented toward the future events that will gradually unfold in the last days. Yet the purpose of John’s elaborate prophecy is not to satisfy the curiosity of his audience but rather to comfort and encourage them in the midst of persecution.<\/p>\n<h5>The Form of Christian Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>Unlike the prophets of the OT, Christian prophets did not always present their message in the form of a direct speech from God or Jesus. There are few, if any, formal indicators of the presence of prophetic speech in early Christian literature. The book of Revelation is one notable exception.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dreams; Oracle; Promise; Prophet, Prophetess; Prophets, False; Visions.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PROPHECY Term, along with its English cognates (“prophet,” “to prophesy,” “prophetism,” and “prophetic”), derived from a group of Greek words that, in secular Greek, mean “speak forth,” “proclaim,” “announce.” In biblical Greek, however, these terms always carry the connotation of speaking, proclaiming, or announcing something under the influence of spiritual inspiration. Preview • Prophecy in the Old Testament • Types of Old Testament Prophets • The Message of the Prophets • Prophecy in the ...","summary_en":"PROPHECY Term, along with its English cognates (“prophet,” “to prophesy,” “prophetism,” and “prophetic”), derived from a group of Greek words that, in secular Greek, mean “speak forth,” “proclaim,” “announce.” In biblical Greek, however, these terms always carry the connotation of speaking, proclaiming, or announcing something under the influence of spiritual inspiration. Preview • Prophecy in the Old Testament • Types of Old Testament Prophets • The Message of the Prophets • Prophecy in the ...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56317,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:15","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:15","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:15<\/strong> <em>he existed long before me:<\/em> In a society where age was respected and honored (Lev 19:32; contrast Isa 3:5), John the Baptist emphasized Jesus’ honor by pointing to his existence even before creation (John 1:1-3).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:15<\/strong> <em>he existed long before me:<\/em> In a society where age was respected and honored (Lev 19:32; contrast Isa 3:5), John the Baptist emphasized Jesus’ honor by pointing to his existence even before creation (John 1:1-3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:15 he existed long before me: In a society where age was respected and honored (Lev 19:32; contrast Isa 3:5), John the Baptist emphasized Jesus’ honor by pointing to his existence even before creation (John 1:1-3).","summary_en":"1:15 he existed long before me: In a society where age was respected and honored (Lev 19:32; contrast Isa 3:5), John the Baptist emphasized Jesus’ honor by pointing to his existence even before creation (John 1:1-3).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83943,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:15","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:15","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:15<\/strong> <em>he existed long before me:<\/em> In a society where age was respected and honored (Lev 19:32; contrast Isa 3:5), John the Baptist emphasized Jesus’ honor by pointing to his existence even before creation (John 1:1-3).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:15<\/strong> <em>he existed long before me:<\/em> In a society where age was respected and honored (Lev 19:32; contrast Isa 3:5), John the Baptist emphasized Jesus’ honor by pointing to his existence even before creation (John 1:1-3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:15 he existed long before me: In a society where age was respected and honored (Lev 19:32; contrast Isa 3:5), John the Baptist emphasized Jesus’ honor by pointing to his existence even before creation (John 1:1-3).","summary_en":"1:15 he existed long before me: In a society where age was respected and honored (Lev 19:32; contrast Isa 3:5), John the Baptist emphasized Jesus’ honor by pointing to his existence even before creation (John 1:1-3).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111569,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:15","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:15","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:15<\/strong> <em>he existed long before me:<\/em> In a society where age was respected and honored (Lev 19:32; contrast Isa 3:5), John the Baptist emphasized Jesus’ honor by pointing to his existence even before creation (John 1:1-3).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:15<\/strong> <em>he existed long before me:<\/em> In a society where age was respected and honored (Lev 19:32; contrast Isa 3:5), John the Baptist emphasized Jesus’ honor by pointing to his existence even before creation (John 1:1-3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:15 he existed long before me: In a society where age was respected and honored (Lev 19:32; contrast Isa 3:5), John the Baptist emphasized Jesus’ honor by pointing to his existence even before creation (John 1:1-3).","summary_en":"1:15 he existed long before me: In a society where age was respected and honored (Lev 19:32; contrast Isa 3:5), John the Baptist emphasized Jesus’ honor by pointing to his existence even before creation (John 1:1-3).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139195,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:15","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:15","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:15<\/strong> <em>he existed long before me:<\/em> In a society where age was respected and honored (Lev 19:32; contrast Isa 3:5), John the Baptist emphasized Jesus’ honor by pointing to his existence even before creation (John 1:1-3).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:15<\/strong> <em>he existed long before me:<\/em> In a society where age was respected and honored (Lev 19:32; contrast Isa 3:5), John the Baptist emphasized Jesus’ honor by pointing to his existence even before creation (John 1:1-3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:15 he existed long before me: In a society where age was respected and honored (Lev 19:32; contrast Isa 3:5), John the Baptist emphasized Jesus’ honor by pointing to his existence even before creation (John 1:1-3).","summary_en":"1:15 he existed long before me: In a society where age was respected and honored (Lev 19:32; contrast Isa 3:5), John the Baptist emphasized Jesus’ honor by pointing to his existence even before creation (John 1:1-3).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"16":[{"id":12880,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Fullness","title_en":"Fullness","content_ro":"<h3>FULLNESS<\/h3>\n<p>Common translation of the Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">pleroma<\/span><em>.<\/em> The word carries various shades of meaning that must be determined by observing its use in context.<\/p>\n<h4>General Usage<\/h4>\n<p>In Greek usage outside the NT, the word means “that which fills.” It is found in reference to the cargo or crew that fills a ship, the people that make up a crowd, and the years that fill a person’s life. The philosopher Aristotle used the term to denote the population that fills a city. That sense is used in Matthew’s and Mark’s Gospels of a patch that fills up a hole in an old garment (Mt 9:16; Mk 2:21), and in Mark of the pieces of fish that fill a basket (Mk 6:43; 8:20).<\/p>\n<h4>“Earth” Expressions<\/h4>\n<p>In several instances in the <span>kjv<\/span> the term is found in the phrase “the earth and its fullness” (Pss 24:1; 50:12; 89:11; 1 Cor 10:26) or “the sea and its fullness” (1 Chr 16:32; Ps 96:11-12), meaning “contents.” Beyond its obvious quantitative sense, the meaning in these expressions may reflect a qualitative character: the contents of the earth are good and special. The Hebrew mind viewed the created order as a reflection of the Creator (Pss 8:5-6; 19:1-6; Jer 23:24). Accordingly, whenever people entered into relationship with anything God had created, whether in work or meals or relationships, they also entered objectively into relationship with God, who had given those things. Thus, the Jews heard with horror the prophetic announcement of God’s intention to bring destruction upon “the land and all that fills it” (Jer 8:16; 47:2; Ez 12:19; 19:7; 30:12).<\/p>\n<h4>The Apostle Paul’s Usage<\/h4>\n<p>The origin of Paul’s understanding and use of “fullness” as a significant theological term has been debated. It is held by some that the word was a technical term used by the Gnostics in reference to a realm of spiritual beings that bridged the space between the true God and an “evil” earth. Subsequently, false teachers came to view Christ as one among many deities who lived in that “fullness.” In order to correct the misunderstanding, Paul borrowed the term from his opponents and applied it to Christ. Jesus is not just one of the beings between God and humanity, Paul taught; rather, he is all there is (“the fullness”) between God and humanity (Col 1:15-20).<\/p>\n<p>Against that view it is argued that Paul used the term in several contexts where that interpretation is obviously inadequate (Rom 13:10; Eph 1:22-23). In addition, it is likely that Paul, with his Pharisaic Jewish background, would understand the term in light of its OT usage. Thus, Paul’s use of the term may be better understood as not borrowed from his opponents.<\/p>\n<p>Paul used the term four times in the book of Romans. It can be rendered “full inclusion” in reference to the total number of Jews (Rom 11:12) or Gentiles (v 25) who will come to God. In verse 12, however, the term is set in opposition to the “failure” and “trespass” of the Jews, who feel that righteousness is a matter of their Jewish heritage rather than faith. It may be that Paul used the term in reference to “complete obedience to God’s will.” Thus, in essence Paul said, “If their disobedience means this much good for the world, think of what their obedience will mean.” It is in this active sense that “fullness” is used in Romans 13:10. Love brings to realization all that the law intends. Similarly, Paul desires that his own life be a full expression of the gospel of Christ (15:29).<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Ephesians, the church is referred to as the “fullness of Christ” (Eph 1:22-23; 4:13), and “the fullness of God” (3:19). A variety of interpretations have been offered for this phrase: the church is filled, made complete or whole by Christ; the church possesses the attributes of Christ; the church is the agent through which Christ does all his work. The church is full of Christ in that it is the complete, continuing expression of his words and works (compare Col 2:10). In the book of Colossians, Paul used the term in reference to Christ; in him dwells the “fullness of God” (1:19; 2:9). These passages are often interpreted as proclaiming the equality of Christ with God. All of God’s attributes are contained in Christ. All that God is, Christ is.<\/p>\n<h4>The Apostle John’s Usage<\/h4>\n<p>The prologue to John’s Gospel states that the “fullness of Christ” is received by all believers (1:16). The exact nature of this fullness is defined in verse 14: “And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth.” The Greek word for “fullness” here indicates plenitude and totality. The Gnostics used the word to describe the totality of all deities. John, as with Paul, used the word to describe Christ as the fullness, the plenitude of God, for all the fullness of the Godhead dwells in him bodily (see Col 1:19; 2:9).<\/p>\n<p>Since all of God’s fullness dwells in Christ, every spiritual reality is found in Christ. In Christ, believers lack nothing. Of course, no single believer could receive all that Christ is; it takes the body of Christ to appropriate Christ’s fullness and to express it (Eph 1:23). Nevertheless, each believer receives in measure the same content of that fullness. Christ is continually full; he never is depleted. No matter how much the believers receive of him, he keeps on giving. Believers do not need to seek any other source but Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FULLNESS<\/h3>\n<p>Common translation of the Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">pleroma<\/span><em>.<\/em> The word carries various shades of meaning that must be determined by observing its use in context.<\/p>\n<h4>General Usage<\/h4>\n<p>In Greek usage outside the NT, the word means “that which fills.” It is found in reference to the cargo or crew that fills a ship, the people that make up a crowd, and the years that fill a person’s life. The philosopher Aristotle used the term to denote the population that fills a city. That sense is used in Matthew’s and Mark’s Gospels of a patch that fills up a hole in an old garment (Mt 9:16; Mk 2:21), and in Mark of the pieces of fish that fill a basket (Mk 6:43; 8:20).<\/p>\n<h4>“Earth” Expressions<\/h4>\n<p>In several instances in the <span>kjv<\/span> the term is found in the phrase “the earth and its fullness” (Pss 24:1; 50:12; 89:11; 1 Cor 10:26) or “the sea and its fullness” (1 Chr 16:32; Ps 96:11-12), meaning “contents.” Beyond its obvious quantitative sense, the meaning in these expressions may reflect a qualitative character: the contents of the earth are good and special. The Hebrew mind viewed the created order as a reflection of the Creator (Pss 8:5-6; 19:1-6; Jer 23:24). Accordingly, whenever people entered into relationship with anything God had created, whether in work or meals or relationships, they also entered objectively into relationship with God, who had given those things. Thus, the Jews heard with horror the prophetic announcement of God’s intention to bring destruction upon “the land and all that fills it” (Jer 8:16; 47:2; Ez 12:19; 19:7; 30:12).<\/p>\n<h4>The Apostle Paul’s Usage<\/h4>\n<p>The origin of Paul’s understanding and use of “fullness” as a significant theological term has been debated. It is held by some that the word was a technical term used by the Gnostics in reference to a realm of spiritual beings that bridged the space between the true God and an “evil” earth. Subsequently, false teachers came to view Christ as one among many deities who lived in that “fullness.” In order to correct the misunderstanding, Paul borrowed the term from his opponents and applied it to Christ. Jesus is not just one of the beings between God and humanity, Paul taught; rather, he is all there is (“the fullness”) between God and humanity (Col 1:15-20).<\/p>\n<p>Against that view it is argued that Paul used the term in several contexts where that interpretation is obviously inadequate (Rom 13:10; Eph 1:22-23). In addition, it is likely that Paul, with his Pharisaic Jewish background, would understand the term in light of its OT usage. Thus, Paul’s use of the term may be better understood as not borrowed from his opponents.<\/p>\n<p>Paul used the term four times in the book of Romans. It can be rendered “full inclusion” in reference to the total number of Jews (Rom 11:12) or Gentiles (v 25) who will come to God. In verse 12, however, the term is set in opposition to the “failure” and “trespass” of the Jews, who feel that righteousness is a matter of their Jewish heritage rather than faith. It may be that Paul used the term in reference to “complete obedience to God’s will.” Thus, in essence Paul said, “If their disobedience means this much good for the world, think of what their obedience will mean.” It is in this active sense that “fullness” is used in Romans 13:10. Love brings to realization all that the law intends. Similarly, Paul desires that his own life be a full expression of the gospel of Christ (15:29).<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Ephesians, the church is referred to as the “fullness of Christ” (Eph 1:22-23; 4:13), and “the fullness of God” (3:19). A variety of interpretations have been offered for this phrase: the church is filled, made complete or whole by Christ; the church possesses the attributes of Christ; the church is the agent through which Christ does all his work. The church is full of Christ in that it is the complete, continuing expression of his words and works (compare Col 2:10). In the book of Colossians, Paul used the term in reference to Christ; in him dwells the “fullness of God” (1:19; 2:9). These passages are often interpreted as proclaiming the equality of Christ with God. All of God’s attributes are contained in Christ. All that God is, Christ is.<\/p>\n<h4>The Apostle John’s Usage<\/h4>\n<p>The prologue to John’s Gospel states that the “fullness of Christ” is received by all believers (1:16). The exact nature of this fullness is defined in verse 14: “And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth.” The Greek word for “fullness” here indicates plenitude and totality. The Gnostics used the word to describe the totality of all deities. John, as with Paul, used the word to describe Christ as the fullness, the plenitude of God, for all the fullness of the Godhead dwells in him bodily (see Col 1:19; 2:9).<\/p>\n<p>Since all of God’s fullness dwells in Christ, every spiritual reality is found in Christ. In Christ, believers lack nothing. Of course, no single believer could receive all that Christ is; it takes the body of Christ to appropriate Christ’s fullness and to express it (Eph 1:23). Nevertheless, each believer receives in measure the same content of that fullness. Christ is continually full; he never is depleted. No matter how much the believers receive of him, he keeps on giving. Believers do not need to seek any other source but Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FULLNESS Common translation of the Greek term pleroma. The word carries various shades of meaning that must be determined by observing its use in context. General Usage In Greek usage outside the NT, the word means “that which fills.” It is found in reference to the cargo or crew that fills a ship, the people that make up a crowd, and the years that fill a person’s life. The philosopher Aristotle used the term to denote the population that fills a city. That sense is used in Matthew’s and Mar...","summary_en":"FULLNESS Common translation of the Greek term pleroma. The word carries various shades of meaning that must be determined by observing its use in context. General Usage In Greek usage outside the NT, the word means “that which fills.” It is found in reference to the cargo or crew that fills a ship, the people that make up a crowd, and the years that fill a person’s life. The philosopher Aristotle used the term to denote the population that fills a city. That sense is used in Matthew’s and Mar...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":25489,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Messiah","title_en":"Messiah","content_ro":"<h3>MESSIAH<\/h3>\n<p>Title derived from the Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiach<\/span><em>,<\/em> a verbal adjective meaning “anointed one.” Along with its NT equivalent, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> (Christ), it refers to an act of consecration whereby an individual is set apart to serve God and then anointed with oil. The verbal root <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashach<\/span><em>)<\/em> conveys this idea as well.<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s practice of ceremonially anointing with oil is present in several contexts. Priests were regularly anointed prior to their divinely given service at the altar of sacrifice (Lv 4:3). While there is evidence for a literal anointing of prophets (1 Kgs 19:16), this does not appear to have been a standard practice. The anointing of Saul and David by Samuel established the act as a significant prerequisite for Hebrew kings before they assumed their positions of royal leadership. The king was especially considered to be the Lord’s anointed and as such was viewed to hold a secure position before men (1 Sm 12:14; 2 Sm 19:21) and God (Pss 2:2; 20:6). Along with numerous messianic prophecies, these proceedings helped inform the Jews of the Anointed One, par excellence, who would eventually come to bring salvation to Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Concluding the 13 articles of Hebraic faith attributed to Moses Maimonides (13th century <span>AD<\/span>) is the statement still found in many Hebrew prayer books: “I believe with a perfect heart that the Messiah will come; and although his coming be delayed, I will still wait patiently for his speedy appearance.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MessiahintheOldTestament\">Messiah in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Jewish hope for the advent of the Messiah developed dynamically from the period of David’s reign, when it was prophesied that his kingdom would endure to the end of time (2 Sm 7:16). Israel was told that, through David’s descendants, his throne would exert a never-ending dominion over all the earth (2 Sm 22:48-51; Jer 33). It is with this aspect of messianic salvation that Jewish minds have traditionally been preoccupied (cf. Acts 1:6).<\/p>\n<p>Among Orthodox rabbis there has never been a lack of conjecture respecting the details of the Messiah’s ministry. At one time the rabbis applied no less than 456 passages of Scripture to his person and salvation. Preoccupation with the Messiah is evident in the tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> (Babylonian Talmud), where passages state that the world was created for him and that all the prophets prophesied of his days (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 98b, 99a). By and large, Orthodoxy still retains its time-worn belief in the Messiah’s reign in Jerusalem, the rebuilding of the temple, and the reestablishment of both priesthood and sacrifice.<\/p>\n<p>While later Judaism looked for the Messiah as an eschatological figure who will reign at the end of time, modern Jewish thought has largely jettisoned the traditional notion of a personal Messiah in favor of belief in a messianic age. Prevalent liberal Judaism envisions the world ultimately perfected through the influence of the twin Judaic ideals of justice and compassion. Such conviction, ignoring the plight of fallen humans and the teaching of Scripture, substitutes humanistic thinking for miraculous heavenly intervention.<\/p>\n<p>While the Messiah’s origin is linked firmly to the house of David (2 Sm 7:14; Hos 3:5), the promise for a Messiah was given long before David lived. In fact, the hope for the Messiah is implicit in the first promise of the establishment of the kingdom of God. Addressed to Satan, Genesis 3:15 declares that God will place hostility between the serpent and the woman until, in the fullness of time, the “seed” of the woman inflicts a fatal blow to the head of the serpent.<\/p>\n<p>The nature of messianic prophecy is progressive; each prophecy casts more light on the subject. This occurs, for example, respecting the concept of the “seed”: Messiah is to be born of a woman (Gn 3:15), through the line of Shem (9:26) and specifically through Abraham (22:18). Yet even as late as Genesis 22:18, the “seed” is not clearly presented as a person, since <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">zerah<\/span> (seed) may indicate a singular or plural object. Still less apparent in these early stages of messianic prophecy is the nature of the “bruising” that is to occur. Yet the idea of the Messiah being crushed for sin is implicit in the Genesis pronouncement, as is the violence associated with that act. Chief among the messianic prophets, Isaiah gives full range to the axiom that the Anointed One must endure extensive suffering (Is 53:1). Under the figure “the Servant of the Lord,” four “servant songs” delineate the mission of the future deliverer (Is 42:1-7; 49:1-9; 50:4-11; 52:13–53:12). While it is true that Isaiah does not explicitly link the title Messiah with the Servant of the Lord, identifying both figures as one and the same person is justifiable. Both figures are uniquely anointed (61:1); each brings light to the Gentiles (55:4; cf. 49:6); neither is pretentious in his first appearance (7:14-15; 11:1; cf. 42:3; 53:1); and the title of Davidic “branch” rests upon them both (11:1-4). Equally significant are the dual facts of their humiliation and exaltation (49:7; 52:13-15). Jewish scholars of the early Christian era in the Aramaic Targum on the prophets paraphrase Isaiah 42:1, “Behold my Servant Messiah” and begin Isaiah 53, “Behold my Servant Messiah will prosper.” While Cyrus may be spoken of as “anointed,” no final salvific work is attributed to him (45:1-5). Israel, although elect and loved by God (41:8), is ill-equipped as God’s servant to bring his redeeming work to mankind (42:18). The collapse of David’s dynasty points eloquently to Israel’s need for an anointed monarch who will heal the apostasy and disobedience (Ex 33:5; Hos 4:1). More and more, OT history presents Israel’s comprehensive moral failure. Her problem, which she shares with mankind, can only be solved by the making of a covenant whose surety and focal point is both a personal Savior and sovereign Lord (Jer 31:31-34). The advent of such a champion lives in the recorded promise of a shoot from the stump of Jesse’s fallen tree, who will bring the light of life to God’s benighted people (Is 9:2; 11:1).<\/p>\n<p>It is difficult to get away from the idea that the concept of servanthood and lowliness belongs within the sphere of royalty (Zec 9:9). The concept of the Messiah filling the complementary offices of priest and king is incontrovertible (Ps 110:1-4); a suffering priest-king is far less obvious. Some among the Talmudic writers apparently recognized the likelihood that the Messiah would have to suffer. In the Babylonian Talmud, tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 98b, the Messiah is said to bear sicknesses and pain. Among the prayers for the Day of Atonement may be found the words of Eleazar ben Qalir (perhaps as late as <span>AD<\/span> 1000): “Our righteous Messiah has departed from us; we are horror-stricken, and there is none to justify us. Our iniquities and the yoke of our transgressions he carries, and is wounded for our transgressions. He bears on his shoulders our sins to find pardon for our iniquities. May we be healed by his stripes.” In a similar vein Rabbi Eliyya de Vidas writes, “The meaning of ‘He was wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities,’ is that since the Messiah bears our iniquities, which produce the effect of His being bruised, it follows that whosoever will not admit that the Messiah thus suffers for our iniquities must endure and suffer for them himself.” For all this, it is highly doubtful that anyone imagined the Messiah would accomplish his salvational work by means of his own death (cf. Is 53:12). When rabbinic speculation failed to satisfactorily harmonize the paradoxical facts of humiliation and exaltation, some hypothesized that God would send a Messiah to suffer as well as a Messiah to reign. Biblically, it is evident that the Anointed One’s terrible ordeal of suffering is but the necessary prelude to infinite glory. He is pictured not only as a great king (52:13; 53:12) but also as humble (53:2), humiliated (52:14), rejected (53:3), and bearing the consequences of mankind’s rebellion (vv 5-6). Yet he is raised up to intercede for, and richly bless, his people (v 12). The Messiah, having accomplished that full obedience that Adam and Israel failed to achieve, will bring Israel and the nations back to God (42:18-19; 49:3, 6).<\/p>\n<p>The writings of Daniel contain important messianic data. Daniel is unique in that he boldly speaks of “Messiah the Prince” (Dn 9:25), identifies him as the “Son of Man” (7:13), and says he suffers (“cut off,” 9:26). This statement of the cutting off (i.e., death) of the Messiah makes possible his work of atonement (9:24). The doctrine of a vicarious substitutionary atonement is the only doctrine of atonement found in the Bible (cf. Lv 17:11). Israel understood that to bear sin meant enduring the consequences, or penalty, for sin (cf. Nm 14:33). The same penal substitution is evident in the working principle of the Messiah’s atoning sacrifice. He is the victim’s substitute to whom is transferred the suffering due the sinner. The penalty having been thus borne vicariously, the suppliant is fully pardoned.<\/p>\n<p>Psalm 22:1 records the plaintive cry of the Messiah bearing man’s penalty for sin (cf. Mt 27:46) as he becomes sin on behalf of his people (2 Cor 5:21). Yet his cry, “My God,” indicates an intimate relationship that cannot be radically severed. Once again the motif of messianic humiliation prior to great exaltation is in view (Ps 22:27). In the so-called “royal psalms” (e.g., 2; 72; 110) it is the priestly intercessor who is also ordained to function as monarch and judge.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah brings the portrait a step further. The one who will enable humans to enter into a salvational covenant with God conveys God’s imputed righteousness: the Messiah, God’s righteous branch, becomes “the Lord our Righteousness.” Paradoxically, under the law no one could be crucified who was not guilty of sin (Dt 21:22). But it is Christ the righteous one who was crucified, thereby forever undermining any supposed legalistic confidence (Dt 21:23; Gal 3:13). More than forgiven, believers are deemed righteous in him (Jer 23:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>While the birthplace of the Messiah was well established (Mi 5:2), his deity was a hotly contested matter. Although few in ancient Israel disputed the belief in a superhuman Messiah, it is doubtful that anyone imagined him to be “God with us” in the fullest sense of the expression (cf. Heb 1:3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MessiahintheNewTestament\">Messiah in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The NT writers present the picture that he who was the child of supernatural origins (Is 7:14; Mi 5:2) carried the full weight of divinity (Is 9:6; Phil 2:6; Col 1:19). He is the Son of God, worthy to receive the worship of all people (Ps 45:6-7; cf. Heb 1:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>The Jews of first-century Palestine knew that the messianic promise would be fulfilled in the coming of one like Moses (Dt 18:18). Parallels between Jesus and Moses are abundant. As mediators, innovators, and propagators of new phases of spiritual life for the people, they are unexcelled. Specifically, both are miraculously spared in infancy (Ex 2; Mt 2:13-23); both renounce a royal court for the sake of serving the people of God (Phil 2:5-8; Heb 11:24-28); both exhibit intense compassion for others (Nm 27:17; Mt 9:36); both commune “face to face” with God (Ex 34:29-30; 2 Cor 3:7); and each mediates a covenant of redemption (Dt 29:1; Heb 8:6-7). But, as Luther observes, “Christ is no Moses.” In the final analysis Moses is but a household servant; the Messiah is the maker and master of all things (Heb 3:3-6; cf. Jn 1:1-2, 18).<\/p>\n<p>Family genealogies are important in Scripture. Rabbis agreed upon the absolute necessity of the Messiah’s Davidic lineage based on Hosea 3:5 and Jeremiah 30:9. The angelic announcement immediately establishes the correct lineage for Jesus (Lk 1:32-33; cf. 2:4), as does Matthew’s (Mt 1:1-17). The Lukan list, like that of Matthew, sets forth the exclusive kingly descent verifying Jesus as Messiah (Lk 3:23-38). Although variations occur between the two genealogies, there is a firm solidarity emphasizing an ancestry within the unique messianic stock. Fully aware of the messianic focus of Scripture (Jn 5:46; 8:56), Jesus acknowledged himself to be the Christ on numerous occasions. He accepted the title from blind Bartimaeus (Mk 10:46-48); from the crowds when he entered Jerusalem (Mt 21:9); from the children at the temple (v 15); and in other contexts as well (Mt 16:16-18; Mk 14:61-62; Lk 4:21; Jn 4:25-26). Nonetheless, he warned his disciples not to broadcast his mighty acts as Messiah prior to his resurrection (Mt 17:9; cf. Lk 9:20-21). Owing to the commonly held (but false) notion that the Messiah’s role was primarily that of a political liberator, Jesus actually avoided use of that term and preferred to identify himself as “the Son of Man.” It was by no means assumed that both designations referred to the same person (cf. Mk 14:61-62). Borrowing essentially from Daniel’s vision of a heavenly conqueror (Dn 7:13-14), Jesus consistently employed this less-known title and filled it with the true character and scope of messianic salvation. Jesus’ teaching in this regard enabled his disciples to correct their erroneous views concerning his mission (Mt 16:21-23). In the fullness of time they would come to see him not only as Messiah but also as the theme of the entire OT (Mt 5:17; Lk 24:27, 44; Jn 5:39; cf. Heb 10:7). When Jesus expounded the Scriptures beginning with the Torah (Lk 24:27), he did so as the living exegesis of God, the Word made flesh (Jn 1:14, 18). Legitimate messianic exposition is found in a host of texts, such as Psalms 2; 16; 22; 40; 110; Isaiah 7:14; 9:6; 11:1; 40:10-11; 50:6; 52:13–53:12; 61:1; 63:1-6; Jeremiah 23:5-6; 33:14-16; Ezekiel 34:23; 37:25; Daniel 9:24-27; Hosea 11:1; Micah 5:2; Zechariah 9:9; 11:13; 12:10; 13:7; Malachi 3:1; 4:2.<\/p>\n<p>The messiahship of Jesus is firmly proclaimed by all four evangelists (Mt 1:1; Mk 1:1; Lk 24:26; Jn 20:31). Peter on Pentecost, Philip before the Ethiopian eunuch, and Apollos in open debate all argue convincingly that Jesus is the Messiah (Acts 2:36; 8:35; 28:28). Peter says he was “made” both Lord and Christ (2:36), signifying that the resurrection rightfully confirms him as such. Similarly, the apostle Paul speaks of Jesus’ resurrection as a patent declaration of his inalienable right to the title (Rom 1:4). For the ex-Pharisee and former persecutor of the church, “Jesus the Christ” is the very heart and soul of Paul’s preaching. Nothing is worthy to be compared to the glory of the Messiah; everything pales by comparison (Phil 3:5-10). The apostle’s all-consuming passion is for others to know the fullness of God in the person of his only Son (Eph 3:14-19).<\/p>\n<p>The Holy Spirit in Scripture speaks of Jesus with wide-ranging appellatives—Holy One, Judge, Righteous One, King, Son of God, and Lord—but these are not exhaustive. In him all the lines of messianic prediction converge; he is the touchstone whereby their validity is firmly established. The Lord Jesus Christ is himself the heart and substance of that covenant through which sinful people may be reconciled to a holy God (Is 42:6; Jn 14:6). That Jesus is the Messiah of Israel, God incarnate, exhaustively fulfills prophecy, type, and symbol—all shadows of his coming. Therefore, all should trust in him, the source of all grace, the only abiding treasure (Mt 12:21; Jn 1:16-17; Col 2:3). Anointed as prophet, he leads us into all truth (Jn 6:14; 7:16); as priest he intercedes for us (Heb 7:21); and as king he reigns over us (Phil 2:9-10).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Branch; Christology; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Redeemer, Redemption; Son of God; Son of Man.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MESSIAH<\/h3>\n<p>Title derived from the Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiach<\/span><em>,<\/em> a verbal adjective meaning “anointed one.” Along with its NT equivalent, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> (Christ), it refers to an act of consecration whereby an individual is set apart to serve God and then anointed with oil. The verbal root <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashach<\/span><em>)<\/em> conveys this idea as well.<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s practice of ceremonially anointing with oil is present in several contexts. Priests were regularly anointed prior to their divinely given service at the altar of sacrifice (Lv 4:3). While there is evidence for a literal anointing of prophets (1 Kgs 19:16), this does not appear to have been a standard practice. The anointing of Saul and David by Samuel established the act as a significant prerequisite for Hebrew kings before they assumed their positions of royal leadership. The king was especially considered to be the Lord’s anointed and as such was viewed to hold a secure position before men (1 Sm 12:14; 2 Sm 19:21) and God (Pss 2:2; 20:6). Along with numerous messianic prophecies, these proceedings helped inform the Jews of the Anointed One, par excellence, who would eventually come to bring salvation to Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Concluding the 13 articles of Hebraic faith attributed to Moses Maimonides (13th century <span>AD<\/span>) is the statement still found in many Hebrew prayer books: “I believe with a perfect heart that the Messiah will come; and although his coming be delayed, I will still wait patiently for his speedy appearance.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MessiahintheOldTestament\">Messiah in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Jewish hope for the advent of the Messiah developed dynamically from the period of David’s reign, when it was prophesied that his kingdom would endure to the end of time (2 Sm 7:16). Israel was told that, through David’s descendants, his throne would exert a never-ending dominion over all the earth (2 Sm 22:48-51; Jer 33). It is with this aspect of messianic salvation that Jewish minds have traditionally been preoccupied (cf. Acts 1:6).<\/p>\n<p>Among Orthodox rabbis there has never been a lack of conjecture respecting the details of the Messiah’s ministry. At one time the rabbis applied no less than 456 passages of Scripture to his person and salvation. Preoccupation with the Messiah is evident in the tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> (Babylonian Talmud), where passages state that the world was created for him and that all the prophets prophesied of his days (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 98b, 99a). By and large, Orthodoxy still retains its time-worn belief in the Messiah’s reign in Jerusalem, the rebuilding of the temple, and the reestablishment of both priesthood and sacrifice.<\/p>\n<p>While later Judaism looked for the Messiah as an eschatological figure who will reign at the end of time, modern Jewish thought has largely jettisoned the traditional notion of a personal Messiah in favor of belief in a messianic age. Prevalent liberal Judaism envisions the world ultimately perfected through the influence of the twin Judaic ideals of justice and compassion. Such conviction, ignoring the plight of fallen humans and the teaching of Scripture, substitutes humanistic thinking for miraculous heavenly intervention.<\/p>\n<p>While the Messiah’s origin is linked firmly to the house of David (2 Sm 7:14; Hos 3:5), the promise for a Messiah was given long before David lived. In fact, the hope for the Messiah is implicit in the first promise of the establishment of the kingdom of God. Addressed to Satan, Genesis 3:15 declares that God will place hostility between the serpent and the woman until, in the fullness of time, the “seed” of the woman inflicts a fatal blow to the head of the serpent.<\/p>\n<p>The nature of messianic prophecy is progressive; each prophecy casts more light on the subject. This occurs, for example, respecting the concept of the “seed”: Messiah is to be born of a woman (Gn 3:15), through the line of Shem (9:26) and specifically through Abraham (22:18). Yet even as late as Genesis 22:18, the “seed” is not clearly presented as a person, since <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">zerah<\/span> (seed) may indicate a singular or plural object. Still less apparent in these early stages of messianic prophecy is the nature of the “bruising” that is to occur. Yet the idea of the Messiah being crushed for sin is implicit in the Genesis pronouncement, as is the violence associated with that act. Chief among the messianic prophets, Isaiah gives full range to the axiom that the Anointed One must endure extensive suffering (Is 53:1). Under the figure “the Servant of the Lord,” four “servant songs” delineate the mission of the future deliverer (Is 42:1-7; 49:1-9; 50:4-11; 52:13–53:12). While it is true that Isaiah does not explicitly link the title Messiah with the Servant of the Lord, identifying both figures as one and the same person is justifiable. Both figures are uniquely anointed (61:1); each brings light to the Gentiles (55:4; cf. 49:6); neither is pretentious in his first appearance (7:14-15; 11:1; cf. 42:3; 53:1); and the title of Davidic “branch” rests upon them both (11:1-4). Equally significant are the dual facts of their humiliation and exaltation (49:7; 52:13-15). Jewish scholars of the early Christian era in the Aramaic Targum on the prophets paraphrase Isaiah 42:1, “Behold my Servant Messiah” and begin Isaiah 53, “Behold my Servant Messiah will prosper.” While Cyrus may be spoken of as “anointed,” no final salvific work is attributed to him (45:1-5). Israel, although elect and loved by God (41:8), is ill-equipped as God’s servant to bring his redeeming work to mankind (42:18). The collapse of David’s dynasty points eloquently to Israel’s need for an anointed monarch who will heal the apostasy and disobedience (Ex 33:5; Hos 4:1). More and more, OT history presents Israel’s comprehensive moral failure. Her problem, which she shares with mankind, can only be solved by the making of a covenant whose surety and focal point is both a personal Savior and sovereign Lord (Jer 31:31-34). The advent of such a champion lives in the recorded promise of a shoot from the stump of Jesse’s fallen tree, who will bring the light of life to God’s benighted people (Is 9:2; 11:1).<\/p>\n<p>It is difficult to get away from the idea that the concept of servanthood and lowliness belongs within the sphere of royalty (Zec 9:9). The concept of the Messiah filling the complementary offices of priest and king is incontrovertible (Ps 110:1-4); a suffering priest-king is far less obvious. Some among the Talmudic writers apparently recognized the likelihood that the Messiah would have to suffer. In the Babylonian Talmud, tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 98b, the Messiah is said to bear sicknesses and pain. Among the prayers for the Day of Atonement may be found the words of Eleazar ben Qalir (perhaps as late as <span>AD<\/span> 1000): “Our righteous Messiah has departed from us; we are horror-stricken, and there is none to justify us. Our iniquities and the yoke of our transgressions he carries, and is wounded for our transgressions. He bears on his shoulders our sins to find pardon for our iniquities. May we be healed by his stripes.” In a similar vein Rabbi Eliyya de Vidas writes, “The meaning of ‘He was wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities,’ is that since the Messiah bears our iniquities, which produce the effect of His being bruised, it follows that whosoever will not admit that the Messiah thus suffers for our iniquities must endure and suffer for them himself.” For all this, it is highly doubtful that anyone imagined the Messiah would accomplish his salvational work by means of his own death (cf. Is 53:12). When rabbinic speculation failed to satisfactorily harmonize the paradoxical facts of humiliation and exaltation, some hypothesized that God would send a Messiah to suffer as well as a Messiah to reign. Biblically, it is evident that the Anointed One’s terrible ordeal of suffering is but the necessary prelude to infinite glory. He is pictured not only as a great king (52:13; 53:12) but also as humble (53:2), humiliated (52:14), rejected (53:3), and bearing the consequences of mankind’s rebellion (vv 5-6). Yet he is raised up to intercede for, and richly bless, his people (v 12). The Messiah, having accomplished that full obedience that Adam and Israel failed to achieve, will bring Israel and the nations back to God (42:18-19; 49:3, 6).<\/p>\n<p>The writings of Daniel contain important messianic data. Daniel is unique in that he boldly speaks of “Messiah the Prince” (Dn 9:25), identifies him as the “Son of Man” (7:13), and says he suffers (“cut off,” 9:26). This statement of the cutting off (i.e., death) of the Messiah makes possible his work of atonement (9:24). The doctrine of a vicarious substitutionary atonement is the only doctrine of atonement found in the Bible (cf. Lv 17:11). Israel understood that to bear sin meant enduring the consequences, or penalty, for sin (cf. Nm 14:33). The same penal substitution is evident in the working principle of the Messiah’s atoning sacrifice. He is the victim’s substitute to whom is transferred the suffering due the sinner. The penalty having been thus borne vicariously, the suppliant is fully pardoned.<\/p>\n<p>Psalm 22:1 records the plaintive cry of the Messiah bearing man’s penalty for sin (cf. Mt 27:46) as he becomes sin on behalf of his people (2 Cor 5:21). Yet his cry, “My God,” indicates an intimate relationship that cannot be radically severed. Once again the motif of messianic humiliation prior to great exaltation is in view (Ps 22:27). In the so-called “royal psalms” (e.g., 2; 72; 110) it is the priestly intercessor who is also ordained to function as monarch and judge.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah brings the portrait a step further. The one who will enable humans to enter into a salvational covenant with God conveys God’s imputed righteousness: the Messiah, God’s righteous branch, becomes “the Lord our Righteousness.” Paradoxically, under the law no one could be crucified who was not guilty of sin (Dt 21:22). But it is Christ the righteous one who was crucified, thereby forever undermining any supposed legalistic confidence (Dt 21:23; Gal 3:13). More than forgiven, believers are deemed righteous in him (Jer 23:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>While the birthplace of the Messiah was well established (Mi 5:2), his deity was a hotly contested matter. Although few in ancient Israel disputed the belief in a superhuman Messiah, it is doubtful that anyone imagined him to be “God with us” in the fullest sense of the expression (cf. Heb 1:3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MessiahintheNewTestament\">Messiah in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The NT writers present the picture that he who was the child of supernatural origins (Is 7:14; Mi 5:2) carried the full weight of divinity (Is 9:6; Phil 2:6; Col 1:19). He is the Son of God, worthy to receive the worship of all people (Ps 45:6-7; cf. Heb 1:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>The Jews of first-century Palestine knew that the messianic promise would be fulfilled in the coming of one like Moses (Dt 18:18). Parallels between Jesus and Moses are abundant. As mediators, innovators, and propagators of new phases of spiritual life for the people, they are unexcelled. Specifically, both are miraculously spared in infancy (Ex 2; Mt 2:13-23); both renounce a royal court for the sake of serving the people of God (Phil 2:5-8; Heb 11:24-28); both exhibit intense compassion for others (Nm 27:17; Mt 9:36); both commune “face to face” with God (Ex 34:29-30; 2 Cor 3:7); and each mediates a covenant of redemption (Dt 29:1; Heb 8:6-7). But, as Luther observes, “Christ is no Moses.” In the final analysis Moses is but a household servant; the Messiah is the maker and master of all things (Heb 3:3-6; cf. Jn 1:1-2, 18).<\/p>\n<p>Family genealogies are important in Scripture. Rabbis agreed upon the absolute necessity of the Messiah’s Davidic lineage based on Hosea 3:5 and Jeremiah 30:9. The angelic announcement immediately establishes the correct lineage for Jesus (Lk 1:32-33; cf. 2:4), as does Matthew’s (Mt 1:1-17). The Lukan list, like that of Matthew, sets forth the exclusive kingly descent verifying Jesus as Messiah (Lk 3:23-38). Although variations occur between the two genealogies, there is a firm solidarity emphasizing an ancestry within the unique messianic stock. Fully aware of the messianic focus of Scripture (Jn 5:46; 8:56), Jesus acknowledged himself to be the Christ on numerous occasions. He accepted the title from blind Bartimaeus (Mk 10:46-48); from the crowds when he entered Jerusalem (Mt 21:9); from the children at the temple (v 15); and in other contexts as well (Mt 16:16-18; Mk 14:61-62; Lk 4:21; Jn 4:25-26). Nonetheless, he warned his disciples not to broadcast his mighty acts as Messiah prior to his resurrection (Mt 17:9; cf. Lk 9:20-21). Owing to the commonly held (but false) notion that the Messiah’s role was primarily that of a political liberator, Jesus actually avoided use of that term and preferred to identify himself as “the Son of Man.” It was by no means assumed that both designations referred to the same person (cf. Mk 14:61-62). Borrowing essentially from Daniel’s vision of a heavenly conqueror (Dn 7:13-14), Jesus consistently employed this less-known title and filled it with the true character and scope of messianic salvation. Jesus’ teaching in this regard enabled his disciples to correct their erroneous views concerning his mission (Mt 16:21-23). In the fullness of time they would come to see him not only as Messiah but also as the theme of the entire OT (Mt 5:17; Lk 24:27, 44; Jn 5:39; cf. Heb 10:7). When Jesus expounded the Scriptures beginning with the Torah (Lk 24:27), he did so as the living exegesis of God, the Word made flesh (Jn 1:14, 18). Legitimate messianic exposition is found in a host of texts, such as Psalms 2; 16; 22; 40; 110; Isaiah 7:14; 9:6; 11:1; 40:10-11; 50:6; 52:13–53:12; 61:1; 63:1-6; Jeremiah 23:5-6; 33:14-16; Ezekiel 34:23; 37:25; Daniel 9:24-27; Hosea 11:1; Micah 5:2; Zechariah 9:9; 11:13; 12:10; 13:7; Malachi 3:1; 4:2.<\/p>\n<p>The messiahship of Jesus is firmly proclaimed by all four evangelists (Mt 1:1; Mk 1:1; Lk 24:26; Jn 20:31). Peter on Pentecost, Philip before the Ethiopian eunuch, and Apollos in open debate all argue convincingly that Jesus is the Messiah (Acts 2:36; 8:35; 28:28). Peter says he was “made” both Lord and Christ (2:36), signifying that the resurrection rightfully confirms him as such. Similarly, the apostle Paul speaks of Jesus’ resurrection as a patent declaration of his inalienable right to the title (Rom 1:4). For the ex-Pharisee and former persecutor of the church, “Jesus the Christ” is the very heart and soul of Paul’s preaching. Nothing is worthy to be compared to the glory of the Messiah; everything pales by comparison (Phil 3:5-10). The apostle’s all-consuming passion is for others to know the fullness of God in the person of his only Son (Eph 3:14-19).<\/p>\n<p>The Holy Spirit in Scripture speaks of Jesus with wide-ranging appellatives—Holy One, Judge, Righteous One, King, Son of God, and Lord—but these are not exhaustive. In him all the lines of messianic prediction converge; he is the touchstone whereby their validity is firmly established. The Lord Jesus Christ is himself the heart and substance of that covenant through which sinful people may be reconciled to a holy God (Is 42:6; Jn 14:6). That Jesus is the Messiah of Israel, God incarnate, exhaustively fulfills prophecy, type, and symbol—all shadows of his coming. Therefore, all should trust in him, the source of all grace, the only abiding treasure (Mt 12:21; Jn 1:16-17; Col 2:3). Anointed as prophet, he leads us into all truth (Jn 6:14; 7:16); as priest he intercedes for us (Heb 7:21); and as king he reigns over us (Phil 2:9-10).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Branch; Christology; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Redeemer, Redemption; Son of God; Son of Man.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MESSIAH Title derived from the Hebrew, mashiach, a verbal adjective meaning “anointed one.” Along with its NT equivalent, christos (Christ), it refers to an act of consecration whereby an individual is set apart to serve God and then anointed with oil. The verbal root (mashach) conveys this idea as well. Israel’s practice of ceremonially anointing with oil is present in several contexts. Priests were regularly anointed prior to their divinely given service at the altar of sacrifice (Lv 4:3). ...","summary_en":"MESSIAH Title derived from the Hebrew, mashiach, a verbal adjective meaning “anointed one.” Along with its NT equivalent, christos (Christ), it refers to an act of consecration whereby an individual is set apart to serve God and then anointed with oil. The verbal root (mashach) conveys this idea as well. Israel’s practice of ceremonially anointing with oil is present in several contexts. Priests were regularly anointed prior to their divinely given service at the altar of sacrifice (Lv 4:3). ...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66805,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Limitations of Law","title_en":"The Limitations of Law","content_ro":"<h3>The Limitations of Law<\/h3>\n<p>The law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and brought death (see 7:5).<\/p>\n<p>Paul wants his readers to realize that the law is not at fault, however. God’s law is good and holy (Rom 7:12), but it is powerless to change the human heart. Whether we conclude that Paul (in Romans 7:14-25) is describing the experience of an unbeliever, a mature believer, or an immature believer, the point remains that human sin cannot be overcome by the law. God’s law is given to people who, because of their connection with Adam, are already locked under sin’s power. They may want to do what God tells them, but they find that they cannot. Deliverance can come only through a new and radical experience of God’s power and grace in Jesus Christ (Rom 7:25). Through God’s Spirit, Jesus rescues us from “the power of sin that leads to death” (Rom 8:2).<\/p>\n<p>If God’s good and holy law cannot rescue us from our predicament and save us, how much less helpful are all human laws that people rely on for religious or spiritual well-being. Whether those laws come from a religious figure, a tradition we have inherited, or a church we attend, none of them can change the human soul. They can tell us what to do, but they cannot empower us to do it. God’s law can provide guidelines in the new life God has given us by grace, but it can never substitute for the power of God’s grace, made available through the work of Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 5:1-33; 6:17-25; Josh 24:19-27; Ezra 7:25-26; Pss 1:1-3; 19:7-14; 78:56-59; 119:144; Isa 24:5; 26:4-8; Jer 31:33-34; Hos 4:6; 8:12; Hab 1:4; Matt 5:17-20; 7:12; Mark 7:8-9; Luke 16:16-17; John 1:16-17; 7:19; Acts 13:38-39; Rom 2:13-29; 3:19-21, 27-28; 4:13-16; 7:1-25; 8:3-4, 7; 9:4, 31-32; 10:3-5; Gal 2:16-21; 3:2, 10-13, 17-25; 5:1-4; 1 Tim 1:5-11; Heb 8:7-13; 10:1-18; 1 Jn 3:4-6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Limitations of Law<\/h3>\n<p>The law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and brought death (see 7:5).<\/p>\n<p>Paul wants his readers to realize that the law is not at fault, however. God’s law is good and holy (Rom 7:12), but it is powerless to change the human heart. Whether we conclude that Paul (in Romans 7:14-25) is describing the experience of an unbeliever, a mature believer, or an immature believer, the point remains that human sin cannot be overcome by the law. God’s law is given to people who, because of their connection with Adam, are already locked under sin’s power. They may want to do what God tells them, but they find that they cannot. Deliverance can come only through a new and radical experience of God’s power and grace in Jesus Christ (Rom 7:25). Through God’s Spirit, Jesus rescues us from “the power of sin that leads to death” (Rom 8:2).<\/p>\n<p>If God’s good and holy law cannot rescue us from our predicament and save us, how much less helpful are all human laws that people rely on for religious or spiritual well-being. Whether those laws come from a religious figure, a tradition we have inherited, or a church we attend, none of them can change the human soul. They can tell us what to do, but they cannot empower us to do it. God’s law can provide guidelines in the new life God has given us by grace, but it can never substitute for the power of God’s grace, made available through the work of Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 5:1-33; 6:17-25; Josh 24:19-27; Ezra 7:25-26; Pss 1:1-3; 19:7-14; 78:56-59; 119:144; Isa 24:5; 26:4-8; Jer 31:33-34; Hos 4:6; 8:12; Hab 1:4; Matt 5:17-20; 7:12; Mark 7:8-9; Luke 16:16-17; John 1:16-17; 7:19; Acts 13:38-39; Rom 2:13-29; 3:19-21, 27-28; 4:13-16; 7:1-25; 8:3-4, 7; 9:4, 31-32; 10:3-5; Gal 2:16-21; 3:2, 10-13, 17-25; 5:1-4; 1 Tim 1:5-11; Heb 8:7-13; 10:1-18; 1 Jn 3:4-6<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Limitations of Law The law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and b...","summary_en":"The Limitations of Law The law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and b...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":94431,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Limitations of Law","title_en":"The Limitations of Law","content_ro":"<h3>The Limitations of Law<\/h3>\n<p>The law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and brought death (see 7:5).<\/p>\n<p>Paul wants his readers to realize that the law is not at fault, however. God’s law is good and holy (Rom 7:12), but it is powerless to change the human heart. Whether we conclude that Paul (in Romans 7:14-25) is describing the experience of an unbeliever, a mature believer, or an immature believer, the point remains that human sin cannot be overcome by the law. God’s law is given to people who, because of their connection with Adam, are already locked under sin’s power. They may want to do what God tells them, but they find that they cannot. Deliverance can come only through a new and radical experience of God’s power and grace in Jesus Christ (Rom 7:25). Through God’s Spirit, Jesus rescues us from “the power of sin that leads to death” (Rom 8:2).<\/p>\n<p>If God’s good and holy law cannot rescue us from our predicament and save us, how much less helpful are all human laws that people rely on for religious or spiritual well-being. Whether those laws come from a religious figure, a tradition we have inherited, or a church we attend, none of them can change the human soul. They can tell us what to do, but they cannot empower us to do it. God’s law can provide guidelines in the new life God has given us by grace, but it can never substitute for the power of God’s grace, made available through the work of Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 5:1-33; 6:17-25; Josh 24:19-27; Ezra 7:25-26; Pss 1:1-3; 19:7-14; 78:56-59; 119:144; Isa 24:5; 26:4-8; Jer 31:33-34; Hos 4:6; 8:12; Hab 1:4; Matt 5:17-20; 7:12; Mark 7:8-9; Luke 16:16-17; John 1:16-17; 7:19; Acts 13:38-39; Rom 2:13-29; 3:19-21, 27-28; 4:13-16; 7:1-25; 8:3-4, 7; 9:4, 31-32; 10:3-5; Gal 2:16-21; 3:2, 10-13, 17-25; 5:1-4; 1 Tim 1:5-11; Heb 8:7-13; 10:1-18; 1 Jn 3:4-6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Limitations of Law<\/h3>\n<p>The law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and brought death (see 7:5).<\/p>\n<p>Paul wants his readers to realize that the law is not at fault, however. God’s law is good and holy (Rom 7:12), but it is powerless to change the human heart. Whether we conclude that Paul (in Romans 7:14-25) is describing the experience of an unbeliever, a mature believer, or an immature believer, the point remains that human sin cannot be overcome by the law. God’s law is given to people who, because of their connection with Adam, are already locked under sin’s power. They may want to do what God tells them, but they find that they cannot. Deliverance can come only through a new and radical experience of God’s power and grace in Jesus Christ (Rom 7:25). Through God’s Spirit, Jesus rescues us from “the power of sin that leads to death” (Rom 8:2).<\/p>\n<p>If God’s good and holy law cannot rescue us from our predicament and save us, how much less helpful are all human laws that people rely on for religious or spiritual well-being. Whether those laws come from a religious figure, a tradition we have inherited, or a church we attend, none of them can change the human soul. They can tell us what to do, but they cannot empower us to do it. God’s law can provide guidelines in the new life God has given us by grace, but it can never substitute for the power of God’s grace, made available through the work of Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 5:1-33; 6:17-25; Josh 24:19-27; Ezra 7:25-26; Pss 1:1-3; 19:7-14; 78:56-59; 119:144; Isa 24:5; 26:4-8; Jer 31:33-34; Hos 4:6; 8:12; Hab 1:4; Matt 5:17-20; 7:12; Mark 7:8-9; Luke 16:16-17; John 1:16-17; 7:19; Acts 13:38-39; Rom 2:13-29; 3:19-21, 27-28; 4:13-16; 7:1-25; 8:3-4, 7; 9:4, 31-32; 10:3-5; Gal 2:16-21; 3:2, 10-13, 17-25; 5:1-4; 1 Tim 1:5-11; Heb 8:7-13; 10:1-18; 1 Jn 3:4-6<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Limitations of Law The law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and b...","summary_en":"The Limitations of Law The law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and b...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":122057,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Limitations of Law","title_en":"The Limitations of Law","content_ro":"<h3>The Limitations of Law<\/h3>\n<p>The law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and brought death (see 7:5).<\/p>\n<p>Paul wants his readers to realize that the law is not at fault, however. God’s law is good and holy (Rom 7:12), but it is powerless to change the human heart. Whether we conclude that Paul (in Romans 7:14-25) is describing the experience of an unbeliever, a mature believer, or an immature believer, the point remains that human sin cannot be overcome by the law. God’s law is given to people who, because of their connection with Adam, are already locked under sin’s power. They may want to do what God tells them, but they find that they cannot. Deliverance can come only through a new and radical experience of God’s power and grace in Jesus Christ (Rom 7:25). Through God’s Spirit, Jesus rescues us from “the power of sin that leads to death” (Rom 8:2).<\/p>\n<p>If God’s good and holy law cannot rescue us from our predicament and save us, how much less helpful are all human laws that people rely on for religious or spiritual well-being. Whether those laws come from a religious figure, a tradition we have inherited, or a church we attend, none of them can change the human soul. They can tell us what to do, but they cannot empower us to do it. God’s law can provide guidelines in the new life God has given us by grace, but it can never substitute for the power of God’s grace, made available through the work of Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 5:1-33; 6:17-25; Josh 24:19-27; Ezra 7:25-26; Pss 1:1-3; 19:7-14; 78:56-59; 119:144; Isa 24:5; 26:4-8; Jer 31:33-34; Hos 4:6; 8:12; Hab 1:4; Matt 5:17-20; 7:12; Mark 7:8-9; Luke 16:16-17; John 1:16-17; 7:19; Acts 13:38-39; Rom 2:13-29; 3:19-21, 27-28; 4:13-16; 7:1-25; 8:3-4, 7; 9:4, 31-32; 10:3-5; Gal 2:16-21; 3:2, 10-13, 17-25; 5:1-4; 1 Tim 1:5-11; Heb 8:7-13; 10:1-18; 1 Jn 3:4-6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Limitations of Law<\/h3>\n<p>The law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and brought death (see 7:5).<\/p>\n<p>Paul wants his readers to realize that the law is not at fault, however. God’s law is good and holy (Rom 7:12), but it is powerless to change the human heart. Whether we conclude that Paul (in Romans 7:14-25) is describing the experience of an unbeliever, a mature believer, or an immature believer, the point remains that human sin cannot be overcome by the law. God’s law is given to people who, because of their connection with Adam, are already locked under sin’s power. They may want to do what God tells them, but they find that they cannot. Deliverance can come only through a new and radical experience of God’s power and grace in Jesus Christ (Rom 7:25). Through God’s Spirit, Jesus rescues us from “the power of sin that leads to death” (Rom 8:2).<\/p>\n<p>If God’s good and holy law cannot rescue us from our predicament and save us, how much less helpful are all human laws that people rely on for religious or spiritual well-being. Whether those laws come from a religious figure, a tradition we have inherited, or a church we attend, none of them can change the human soul. They can tell us what to do, but they cannot empower us to do it. God’s law can provide guidelines in the new life God has given us by grace, but it can never substitute for the power of God’s grace, made available through the work of Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 5:1-33; 6:17-25; Josh 24:19-27; Ezra 7:25-26; Pss 1:1-3; 19:7-14; 78:56-59; 119:144; Isa 24:5; 26:4-8; Jer 31:33-34; Hos 4:6; 8:12; Hab 1:4; Matt 5:17-20; 7:12; Mark 7:8-9; Luke 16:16-17; John 1:16-17; 7:19; Acts 13:38-39; Rom 2:13-29; 3:19-21, 27-28; 4:13-16; 7:1-25; 8:3-4, 7; 9:4, 31-32; 10:3-5; Gal 2:16-21; 3:2, 10-13, 17-25; 5:1-4; 1 Tim 1:5-11; Heb 8:7-13; 10:1-18; 1 Jn 3:4-6<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Limitations of Law The law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and b...","summary_en":"The Limitations of Law The law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and b...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":149683,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Limitations of Law","title_en":"The Limitations of Law","content_ro":"<h3>The Limitations of Law<\/h3>\n<p>The law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and brought death (see 7:5).<\/p>\n<p>Paul wants his readers to realize that the law is not at fault, however. God’s law is good and holy (Rom 7:12), but it is powerless to change the human heart. Whether we conclude that Paul (in Romans 7:14-25) is describing the experience of an unbeliever, a mature believer, or an immature believer, the point remains that human sin cannot be overcome by the law. God’s law is given to people who, because of their connection with Adam, are already locked under sin’s power. They may want to do what God tells them, but they find that they cannot. Deliverance can come only through a new and radical experience of God’s power and grace in Jesus Christ (Rom 7:25). Through God’s Spirit, Jesus rescues us from “the power of sin that leads to death” (Rom 8:2).<\/p>\n<p>If God’s good and holy law cannot rescue us from our predicament and save us, how much less helpful are all human laws that people rely on for religious or spiritual well-being. Whether those laws come from a religious figure, a tradition we have inherited, or a church we attend, none of them can change the human soul. They can tell us what to do, but they cannot empower us to do it. God’s law can provide guidelines in the new life God has given us by grace, but it can never substitute for the power of God’s grace, made available through the work of Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 5:1-33; 6:17-25; Josh 24:19-27; Ezra 7:25-26; Pss 1:1-3; 19:7-14; 78:56-59; 119:144; Isa 24:5; 26:4-8; Jer 31:33-34; Hos 4:6; 8:12; Hab 1:4; Matt 5:17-20; 7:12; Mark 7:8-9; Luke 16:16-17; John 1:16-17; 7:19; Acts 13:38-39; Rom 2:13-29; 3:19-21, 27-28; 4:13-16; 7:1-25; 8:3-4, 7; 9:4, 31-32; 10:3-5; Gal 2:16-21; 3:2, 10-13, 17-25; 5:1-4; 1 Tim 1:5-11; Heb 8:7-13; 10:1-18; 1 Jn 3:4-6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Limitations of Law<\/h3>\n<p>The law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and brought death (see 7:5).<\/p>\n<p>Paul wants his readers to realize that the law is not at fault, however. God’s law is good and holy (Rom 7:12), but it is powerless to change the human heart. Whether we conclude that Paul (in Romans 7:14-25) is describing the experience of an unbeliever, a mature believer, or an immature believer, the point remains that human sin cannot be overcome by the law. God’s law is given to people who, because of their connection with Adam, are already locked under sin’s power. They may want to do what God tells them, but they find that they cannot. Deliverance can come only through a new and radical experience of God’s power and grace in Jesus Christ (Rom 7:25). Through God’s Spirit, Jesus rescues us from “the power of sin that leads to death” (Rom 8:2).<\/p>\n<p>If God’s good and holy law cannot rescue us from our predicament and save us, how much less helpful are all human laws that people rely on for religious or spiritual well-being. Whether those laws come from a religious figure, a tradition we have inherited, or a church we attend, none of them can change the human soul. They can tell us what to do, but they cannot empower us to do it. God’s law can provide guidelines in the new life God has given us by grace, but it can never substitute for the power of God’s grace, made available through the work of Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 5:1-33; 6:17-25; Josh 24:19-27; Ezra 7:25-26; Pss 1:1-3; 19:7-14; 78:56-59; 119:144; Isa 24:5; 26:4-8; Jer 31:33-34; Hos 4:6; 8:12; Hab 1:4; Matt 5:17-20; 7:12; Mark 7:8-9; Luke 16:16-17; John 1:16-17; 7:19; Acts 13:38-39; Rom 2:13-29; 3:19-21, 27-28; 4:13-16; 7:1-25; 8:3-4, 7; 9:4, 31-32; 10:3-5; Gal 2:16-21; 3:2, 10-13, 17-25; 5:1-4; 1 Tim 1:5-11; Heb 8:7-13; 10:1-18; 1 Jn 3:4-6<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Limitations of Law The law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and b...","summary_en":"The Limitations of Law The law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and b...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"17":[{"id":40976,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Moses","title_en":"Moses","content_ro":"<h3>Moses<\/h3>\n<p>Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Moses’ mother, Jochebed, entrusted her infant son to God and set him afloat in the Nile in a reed basket. Pharaoh’s daughter found him and took him into the palace to raise as her own child (Exod 2:3-10).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known about Moses’ upbringing. Jewish tradition holds that he received both administrative and military training in Pharaoh’s household. When he was about forty years old, he killed an Egyptian to rescue a Hebrew slave, and then he fled to Midian (2:11-15; cp. Acts 7:23-29). There he rescued some young women who were being harassed as they watered their flocks. Their father (Jethro) invited him home. Moses married one of the women, Zipporah, and began a family as he cared for his father-in-law’s flocks.<\/p>\n<p>About forty years later, God revealed himself to Moses in a burning bush and commissioned Moses to return to Egypt to rescue his people from slavery (Exod 3:1–4:17). Moses hesitated, fearful that the Israelites would not accept him as their leader. So God revealed to Moses his covenant name, Yahweh, and assigned Aaron as Moses’ spokesman.<\/p>\n<p>Moses and Aaron went to Egypt and confronted Pharaoh, who stubbornly resisted Moses' demand that he free the Israelite slaves. Moses then announced a series of plagues, which eventually convinced Pharaoh to let the Israelites leave. After they had left Egypt, Pharaoh changed his mind and pursued them to the edge of the Red Sea. God enabled the Israelites to cross safely to the other side by dividing the waters; the pursuing Egyptian army was destroyed when the waters closed over them.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led Israel to Mount Sinai, where he had encountered God at the burning bush. God again revealed himself to Moses on that mountain, giving him the law (including the Ten Commandments; Exod 20:1–23:19) and directions for building the Tabernacle. But when Moses came down from the mountain, he found that the people had already deserted the true God by worshiping a gold calf (Exod 32). Moses threw down and broke the two tablets of the law and rallied the Levites to execute some of the offenders. After praying for the people, he received a new copy of the law and led the people in building the Tabernacle.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led a grumbling, rebellious, and distrustful people through the wilderness. Even his own brother and sister challenged his leadership, using his marriage to a Cushite woman as an excuse (Num 12). Moses responded with great humility, and God affirmed that Moses was his spokesman and confidant.<\/p>\n<p>Moses was a great man, but not a perfect one. When the people stretched his patience by complaining about a lack of water, Moses failed to follow God’s instructions and struck a certain rock rather than speaking to it (Num 20:1-13). His actions failed to demonstrate God’s holiness, and by what he said, Moses implied that he had brought the water by his own power (Num 20:10; cp. Ps 106:32-33). As a result, God did not allow him to enter the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>Before his death, Moses delivered a final sermon, known to us as the book of Deuteronomy. The first generation of Israelites, who had come out of Egypt, had died in the wilderness, so Moses was addressing a new generation. Moses renewed the covenant with this generation, reminded them of its terms, and encouraged them to obey it and serve the Lord alone.<\/p>\n<p>After giving this sermon and before Israel entered Canaan, Moses climbed Pisgah Peak on Mount Nebo, where he died. “There has never been another prophet in Israel like Moses, whom the <span>Lord<\/span> knew face to face” (Deut 34:10). Only Jesus surpassed Moses as a mediator between God and human beings (Acts 3:17-26; Heb 3).<\/p>\n<p>Moses is mentioned in the New Testament more than any other Old Testament figure, and he appeared at Jesus’ transfiguration. The New Testament emphasizes his role as lawgiver and draws from Moses’ experiences to show patterns of life under the new covenant. Like Moses, Jesus was rescued as an infant from the evil designs of a human despot (Matt 2:13-18). Jesus’ proclamation of a new law in his Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5–7) parallels the giving of the law at Sinai and presents Jesus as the authoritative interpreter of God’s will. The letter to the Hebrews compares Christ with Moses, while Paul’s letter to the Galatians and the Gospel of John contrast the law of Moses with a believer’s new relationship with God (see John 1:17; Gal 3:1-5; Heb 3:5-6; 9:11–10:18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 2:1-22; 3:1–19:25; 20:19-21; 24:1-18; 31:18; 32:1–34:35; 39:42-43; 40:16; Lev 8:1-36; 10:1-20; 24:10-23; Num 7:1-11, 89; 9:1-14; 10:29–14:45; 15:32-36; 16:1–17:13; 20:1-29; 21:4-9; 25:1-5; 27:1-23; 31:1–32:33; 33:1-2; Deut 1:1-5; 31:1–34:12; 1 Chr 23:13-17; Pss 77:20; 90:1-17; 103:7; 105:26-27; 106:32-33; Mark 9:2-13; Acts 7:17-44; 1 Cor 10:1-14; 2 Cor 3:7-18; Gal 3:19; Heb 3:1-19; 8:5; 9:19-22; 11:23-28; 12:18-29<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Moses<\/h3>\n<p>Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Moses’ mother, Jochebed, entrusted her infant son to God and set him afloat in the Nile in a reed basket. Pharaoh’s daughter found him and took him into the palace to raise as her own child (Exod 2:3-10).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known about Moses’ upbringing. Jewish tradition holds that he received both administrative and military training in Pharaoh’s household. When he was about forty years old, he killed an Egyptian to rescue a Hebrew slave, and then he fled to Midian (2:11-15; cp. Acts 7:23-29). There he rescued some young women who were being harassed as they watered their flocks. Their father (Jethro) invited him home. Moses married one of the women, Zipporah, and began a family as he cared for his father-in-law’s flocks.<\/p>\n<p>About forty years later, God revealed himself to Moses in a burning bush and commissioned Moses to return to Egypt to rescue his people from slavery (Exod 3:1–4:17). Moses hesitated, fearful that the Israelites would not accept him as their leader. So God revealed to Moses his covenant name, Yahweh, and assigned Aaron as Moses’ spokesman.<\/p>\n<p>Moses and Aaron went to Egypt and confronted Pharaoh, who stubbornly resisted Moses' demand that he free the Israelite slaves. Moses then announced a series of plagues, which eventually convinced Pharaoh to let the Israelites leave. After they had left Egypt, Pharaoh changed his mind and pursued them to the edge of the Red Sea. God enabled the Israelites to cross safely to the other side by dividing the waters; the pursuing Egyptian army was destroyed when the waters closed over them.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led Israel to Mount Sinai, where he had encountered God at the burning bush. God again revealed himself to Moses on that mountain, giving him the law (including the Ten Commandments; Exod 20:1–23:19) and directions for building the Tabernacle. But when Moses came down from the mountain, he found that the people had already deserted the true God by worshiping a gold calf (Exod 32). Moses threw down and broke the two tablets of the law and rallied the Levites to execute some of the offenders. After praying for the people, he received a new copy of the law and led the people in building the Tabernacle.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led a grumbling, rebellious, and distrustful people through the wilderness. Even his own brother and sister challenged his leadership, using his marriage to a Cushite woman as an excuse (Num 12). Moses responded with great humility, and God affirmed that Moses was his spokesman and confidant.<\/p>\n<p>Moses was a great man, but not a perfect one. When the people stretched his patience by complaining about a lack of water, Moses failed to follow God’s instructions and struck a certain rock rather than speaking to it (Num 20:1-13). His actions failed to demonstrate God’s holiness, and by what he said, Moses implied that he had brought the water by his own power (Num 20:10; cp. Ps 106:32-33). As a result, God did not allow him to enter the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>Before his death, Moses delivered a final sermon, known to us as the book of Deuteronomy. The first generation of Israelites, who had come out of Egypt, had died in the wilderness, so Moses was addressing a new generation. Moses renewed the covenant with this generation, reminded them of its terms, and encouraged them to obey it and serve the Lord alone.<\/p>\n<p>After giving this sermon and before Israel entered Canaan, Moses climbed Pisgah Peak on Mount Nebo, where he died. “There has never been another prophet in Israel like Moses, whom the <span>Lord<\/span> knew face to face” (Deut 34:10). Only Jesus surpassed Moses as a mediator between God and human beings (Acts 3:17-26; Heb 3).<\/p>\n<p>Moses is mentioned in the New Testament more than any other Old Testament figure, and he appeared at Jesus’ transfiguration. The New Testament emphasizes his role as lawgiver and draws from Moses’ experiences to show patterns of life under the new covenant. Like Moses, Jesus was rescued as an infant from the evil designs of a human despot (Matt 2:13-18). Jesus’ proclamation of a new law in his Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5–7) parallels the giving of the law at Sinai and presents Jesus as the authoritative interpreter of God’s will. The letter to the Hebrews compares Christ with Moses, while Paul’s letter to the Galatians and the Gospel of John contrast the law of Moses with a believer’s new relationship with God (see John 1:17; Gal 3:1-5; Heb 3:5-6; 9:11–10:18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 2:1-22; 3:1–19:25; 20:19-21; 24:1-18; 31:18; 32:1–34:35; 39:42-43; 40:16; Lev 8:1-36; 10:1-20; 24:10-23; Num 7:1-11, 89; 9:1-14; 10:29–14:45; 15:32-36; 16:1–17:13; 20:1-29; 21:4-9; 25:1-5; 27:1-23; 31:1–32:33; 33:1-2; Deut 1:1-5; 31:1–34:12; 1 Chr 23:13-17; Pss 77:20; 90:1-17; 103:7; 105:26-27; 106:32-33; Mark 9:2-13; Acts 7:17-44; 1 Cor 10:1-14; 2 Cor 3:7-18; Gal 3:19; Heb 3:1-19; 8:5; 9:19-22; 11:23-28; 12:18-29<\/p>","summary_ro":"Moses Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture. The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Mos...","summary_en":"Moses Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture. The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Mos...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":68602,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Moses","title_en":"Moses","content_ro":"<h3>Moses<\/h3>\n<p>Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Moses’ mother, Jochebed, entrusted her infant son to God and set him afloat in the Nile in a reed basket. Pharaoh’s daughter found him and took him into the palace to raise as her own child (Exod 2:3-10).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known about Moses’ upbringing. Jewish tradition holds that he received both administrative and military training in Pharaoh’s household. When he was about forty years old, he killed an Egyptian to rescue a Hebrew slave, and then he fled to Midian (2:11-15; cp. Acts 7:23-29). There he rescued some young women who were being harassed as they watered their flocks. Their father (Jethro) invited him home. Moses married one of the women, Zipporah, and began a family as he cared for his father-in-law’s flocks.<\/p>\n<p>About forty years later, God revealed himself to Moses in a burning bush and commissioned Moses to return to Egypt to rescue his people from slavery (Exod 3:1–4:17). Moses hesitated, fearful that the Israelites would not accept him as their leader. So God revealed to Moses his covenant name, Yahweh, and assigned Aaron as Moses’ spokesman.<\/p>\n<p>Moses and Aaron went to Egypt and confronted Pharaoh, who stubbornly resisted Moses' demand that he free the Israelite slaves. Moses then announced a series of plagues, which eventually convinced Pharaoh to let the Israelites leave. After they had left Egypt, Pharaoh changed his mind and pursued them to the edge of the Red Sea. God enabled the Israelites to cross safely to the other side by dividing the waters; the pursuing Egyptian army was destroyed when the waters closed over them.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led Israel to Mount Sinai, where he had encountered God at the burning bush. God again revealed himself to Moses on that mountain, giving him the law (including the Ten Commandments; Exod 20:1–23:19) and directions for building the Tabernacle. But when Moses came down from the mountain, he found that the people had already deserted the true God by worshiping a gold calf (Exod 32). Moses threw down and broke the two tablets of the law and rallied the Levites to execute some of the offenders. After praying for the people, he received a new copy of the law and led the people in building the Tabernacle.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led a grumbling, rebellious, and distrustful people through the wilderness. Even his own brother and sister challenged his leadership, using his marriage to a Cushite woman as an excuse (Num 12). Moses responded with great humility, and God affirmed that Moses was his spokesman and confidant.<\/p>\n<p>Moses was a great man, but not a perfect one. When the people stretched his patience by complaining about a lack of water, Moses failed to follow God’s instructions and struck a certain rock rather than speaking to it (Num 20:1-13). His actions failed to demonstrate God’s holiness, and by what he said, Moses implied that he had brought the water by his own power (Num 20:10; cp. Ps 106:32-33). As a result, God did not allow him to enter the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>Before his death, Moses delivered a final sermon, known to us as the book of Deuteronomy. The first generation of Israelites, who had come out of Egypt, had died in the wilderness, so Moses was addressing a new generation. Moses renewed the covenant with this generation, reminded them of its terms, and encouraged them to obey it and serve the Lord alone.<\/p>\n<p>After giving this sermon and before Israel entered Canaan, Moses climbed Pisgah Peak on Mount Nebo, where he died. “There has never been another prophet in Israel like Moses, whom the <span>Lord<\/span> knew face to face” (Deut 34:10). Only Jesus surpassed Moses as a mediator between God and human beings (Acts 3:17-26; Heb 3).<\/p>\n<p>Moses is mentioned in the New Testament more than any other Old Testament figure, and he appeared at Jesus’ transfiguration. The New Testament emphasizes his role as lawgiver and draws from Moses’ experiences to show patterns of life under the new covenant. Like Moses, Jesus was rescued as an infant from the evil designs of a human despot (Matt 2:13-18). Jesus’ proclamation of a new law in his Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5–7) parallels the giving of the law at Sinai and presents Jesus as the authoritative interpreter of God’s will. The letter to the Hebrews compares Christ with Moses, while Paul’s letter to the Galatians and the Gospel of John contrast the law of Moses with a believer’s new relationship with God (see John 1:17; Gal 3:1-5; Heb 3:5-6; 9:11–10:18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 2:1-22; 3:1–19:25; 20:19-21; 24:1-18; 31:18; 32:1–34:35; 39:42-43; 40:16; Lev 8:1-36; 10:1-20; 24:10-23; Num 7:1-11, 89; 9:1-14; 10:29–14:45; 15:32-36; 16:1–17:13; 20:1-29; 21:4-9; 25:1-5; 27:1-23; 31:1–32:33; 33:1-2; Deut 1:1-5; 31:1–34:12; 1 Chr 23:13-17; Pss 77:20; 90:1-17; 103:7; 105:26-27; 106:32-33; Mark 9:2-13; Acts 7:17-44; 1 Cor 10:1-14; 2 Cor 3:7-18; Gal 3:19; Heb 3:1-19; 8:5; 9:19-22; 11:23-28; 12:18-29<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Moses<\/h3>\n<p>Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Moses’ mother, Jochebed, entrusted her infant son to God and set him afloat in the Nile in a reed basket. Pharaoh’s daughter found him and took him into the palace to raise as her own child (Exod 2:3-10).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known about Moses’ upbringing. Jewish tradition holds that he received both administrative and military training in Pharaoh’s household. When he was about forty years old, he killed an Egyptian to rescue a Hebrew slave, and then he fled to Midian (2:11-15; cp. Acts 7:23-29). There he rescued some young women who were being harassed as they watered their flocks. Their father (Jethro) invited him home. Moses married one of the women, Zipporah, and began a family as he cared for his father-in-law’s flocks.<\/p>\n<p>About forty years later, God revealed himself to Moses in a burning bush and commissioned Moses to return to Egypt to rescue his people from slavery (Exod 3:1–4:17). Moses hesitated, fearful that the Israelites would not accept him as their leader. So God revealed to Moses his covenant name, Yahweh, and assigned Aaron as Moses’ spokesman.<\/p>\n<p>Moses and Aaron went to Egypt and confronted Pharaoh, who stubbornly resisted Moses' demand that he free the Israelite slaves. Moses then announced a series of plagues, which eventually convinced Pharaoh to let the Israelites leave. After they had left Egypt, Pharaoh changed his mind and pursued them to the edge of the Red Sea. God enabled the Israelites to cross safely to the other side by dividing the waters; the pursuing Egyptian army was destroyed when the waters closed over them.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led Israel to Mount Sinai, where he had encountered God at the burning bush. God again revealed himself to Moses on that mountain, giving him the law (including the Ten Commandments; Exod 20:1–23:19) and directions for building the Tabernacle. But when Moses came down from the mountain, he found that the people had already deserted the true God by worshiping a gold calf (Exod 32). Moses threw down and broke the two tablets of the law and rallied the Levites to execute some of the offenders. After praying for the people, he received a new copy of the law and led the people in building the Tabernacle.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led a grumbling, rebellious, and distrustful people through the wilderness. Even his own brother and sister challenged his leadership, using his marriage to a Cushite woman as an excuse (Num 12). Moses responded with great humility, and God affirmed that Moses was his spokesman and confidant.<\/p>\n<p>Moses was a great man, but not a perfect one. When the people stretched his patience by complaining about a lack of water, Moses failed to follow God’s instructions and struck a certain rock rather than speaking to it (Num 20:1-13). His actions failed to demonstrate God’s holiness, and by what he said, Moses implied that he had brought the water by his own power (Num 20:10; cp. Ps 106:32-33). As a result, God did not allow him to enter the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>Before his death, Moses delivered a final sermon, known to us as the book of Deuteronomy. The first generation of Israelites, who had come out of Egypt, had died in the wilderness, so Moses was addressing a new generation. Moses renewed the covenant with this generation, reminded them of its terms, and encouraged them to obey it and serve the Lord alone.<\/p>\n<p>After giving this sermon and before Israel entered Canaan, Moses climbed Pisgah Peak on Mount Nebo, where he died. “There has never been another prophet in Israel like Moses, whom the <span>Lord<\/span> knew face to face” (Deut 34:10). Only Jesus surpassed Moses as a mediator between God and human beings (Acts 3:17-26; Heb 3).<\/p>\n<p>Moses is mentioned in the New Testament more than any other Old Testament figure, and he appeared at Jesus’ transfiguration. The New Testament emphasizes his role as lawgiver and draws from Moses’ experiences to show patterns of life under the new covenant. Like Moses, Jesus was rescued as an infant from the evil designs of a human despot (Matt 2:13-18). Jesus’ proclamation of a new law in his Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5–7) parallels the giving of the law at Sinai and presents Jesus as the authoritative interpreter of God’s will. The letter to the Hebrews compares Christ with Moses, while Paul’s letter to the Galatians and the Gospel of John contrast the law of Moses with a believer’s new relationship with God (see John 1:17; Gal 3:1-5; Heb 3:5-6; 9:11–10:18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 2:1-22; 3:1–19:25; 20:19-21; 24:1-18; 31:18; 32:1–34:35; 39:42-43; 40:16; Lev 8:1-36; 10:1-20; 24:10-23; Num 7:1-11, 89; 9:1-14; 10:29–14:45; 15:32-36; 16:1–17:13; 20:1-29; 21:4-9; 25:1-5; 27:1-23; 31:1–32:33; 33:1-2; Deut 1:1-5; 31:1–34:12; 1 Chr 23:13-17; Pss 77:20; 90:1-17; 103:7; 105:26-27; 106:32-33; Mark 9:2-13; Acts 7:17-44; 1 Cor 10:1-14; 2 Cor 3:7-18; Gal 3:19; Heb 3:1-19; 8:5; 9:19-22; 11:23-28; 12:18-29<\/p>","summary_ro":"Moses Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture. The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Mos...","summary_en":"Moses Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture. The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Mos...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":96228,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Moses","title_en":"Moses","content_ro":"<h3>Moses<\/h3>\n<p>Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Moses’ mother, Jochebed, entrusted her infant son to God and set him afloat in the Nile in a reed basket. Pharaoh’s daughter found him and took him into the palace to raise as her own child (Exod 2:3-10).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known about Moses’ upbringing. Jewish tradition holds that he received both administrative and military training in Pharaoh’s household. When he was about forty years old, he killed an Egyptian to rescue a Hebrew slave, and then he fled to Midian (2:11-15; cp. Acts 7:23-29). There he rescued some young women who were being harassed as they watered their flocks. Their father (Jethro) invited him home. Moses married one of the women, Zipporah, and began a family as he cared for his father-in-law’s flocks.<\/p>\n<p>About forty years later, God revealed himself to Moses in a burning bush and commissioned Moses to return to Egypt to rescue his people from slavery (Exod 3:1–4:17). Moses hesitated, fearful that the Israelites would not accept him as their leader. So God revealed to Moses his covenant name, Yahweh, and assigned Aaron as Moses’ spokesman.<\/p>\n<p>Moses and Aaron went to Egypt and confronted Pharaoh, who stubbornly resisted Moses' demand that he free the Israelite slaves. Moses then announced a series of plagues, which eventually convinced Pharaoh to let the Israelites leave. After they had left Egypt, Pharaoh changed his mind and pursued them to the edge of the Red Sea. God enabled the Israelites to cross safely to the other side by dividing the waters; the pursuing Egyptian army was destroyed when the waters closed over them.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led Israel to Mount Sinai, where he had encountered God at the burning bush. God again revealed himself to Moses on that mountain, giving him the law (including the Ten Commandments; Exod 20:1–23:19) and directions for building the Tabernacle. But when Moses came down from the mountain, he found that the people had already deserted the true God by worshiping a gold calf (Exod 32). Moses threw down and broke the two tablets of the law and rallied the Levites to execute some of the offenders. After praying for the people, he received a new copy of the law and led the people in building the Tabernacle.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led a grumbling, rebellious, and distrustful people through the wilderness. Even his own brother and sister challenged his leadership, using his marriage to a Cushite woman as an excuse (Num 12). Moses responded with great humility, and God affirmed that Moses was his spokesman and confidant.<\/p>\n<p>Moses was a great man, but not a perfect one. When the people stretched his patience by complaining about a lack of water, Moses failed to follow God’s instructions and struck a certain rock rather than speaking to it (Num 20:1-13). His actions failed to demonstrate God’s holiness, and by what he said, Moses implied that he had brought the water by his own power (Num 20:10; cp. Ps 106:32-33). As a result, God did not allow him to enter the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>Before his death, Moses delivered a final sermon, known to us as the book of Deuteronomy. The first generation of Israelites, who had come out of Egypt, had died in the wilderness, so Moses was addressing a new generation. Moses renewed the covenant with this generation, reminded them of its terms, and encouraged them to obey it and serve the Lord alone.<\/p>\n<p>After giving this sermon and before Israel entered Canaan, Moses climbed Pisgah Peak on Mount Nebo, where he died. “There has never been another prophet in Israel like Moses, whom the <span>Lord<\/span> knew face to face” (Deut 34:10). Only Jesus surpassed Moses as a mediator between God and human beings (Acts 3:17-26; Heb 3).<\/p>\n<p>Moses is mentioned in the New Testament more than any other Old Testament figure, and he appeared at Jesus’ transfiguration. The New Testament emphasizes his role as lawgiver and draws from Moses’ experiences to show patterns of life under the new covenant. Like Moses, Jesus was rescued as an infant from the evil designs of a human despot (Matt 2:13-18). Jesus’ proclamation of a new law in his Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5–7) parallels the giving of the law at Sinai and presents Jesus as the authoritative interpreter of God’s will. The letter to the Hebrews compares Christ with Moses, while Paul’s letter to the Galatians and the Gospel of John contrast the law of Moses with a believer’s new relationship with God (see John 1:17; Gal 3:1-5; Heb 3:5-6; 9:11–10:18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 2:1-22; 3:1–19:25; 20:19-21; 24:1-18; 31:18; 32:1–34:35; 39:42-43; 40:16; Lev 8:1-36; 10:1-20; 24:10-23; Num 7:1-11, 89; 9:1-14; 10:29–14:45; 15:32-36; 16:1–17:13; 20:1-29; 21:4-9; 25:1-5; 27:1-23; 31:1–32:33; 33:1-2; Deut 1:1-5; 31:1–34:12; 1 Chr 23:13-17; Pss 77:20; 90:1-17; 103:7; 105:26-27; 106:32-33; Mark 9:2-13; Acts 7:17-44; 1 Cor 10:1-14; 2 Cor 3:7-18; Gal 3:19; Heb 3:1-19; 8:5; 9:19-22; 11:23-28; 12:18-29<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Moses<\/h3>\n<p>Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Moses’ mother, Jochebed, entrusted her infant son to God and set him afloat in the Nile in a reed basket. Pharaoh’s daughter found him and took him into the palace to raise as her own child (Exod 2:3-10).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known about Moses’ upbringing. Jewish tradition holds that he received both administrative and military training in Pharaoh’s household. When he was about forty years old, he killed an Egyptian to rescue a Hebrew slave, and then he fled to Midian (2:11-15; cp. Acts 7:23-29). There he rescued some young women who were being harassed as they watered their flocks. Their father (Jethro) invited him home. Moses married one of the women, Zipporah, and began a family as he cared for his father-in-law’s flocks.<\/p>\n<p>About forty years later, God revealed himself to Moses in a burning bush and commissioned Moses to return to Egypt to rescue his people from slavery (Exod 3:1–4:17). Moses hesitated, fearful that the Israelites would not accept him as their leader. So God revealed to Moses his covenant name, Yahweh, and assigned Aaron as Moses’ spokesman.<\/p>\n<p>Moses and Aaron went to Egypt and confronted Pharaoh, who stubbornly resisted Moses' demand that he free the Israelite slaves. Moses then announced a series of plagues, which eventually convinced Pharaoh to let the Israelites leave. After they had left Egypt, Pharaoh changed his mind and pursued them to the edge of the Red Sea. God enabled the Israelites to cross safely to the other side by dividing the waters; the pursuing Egyptian army was destroyed when the waters closed over them.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led Israel to Mount Sinai, where he had encountered God at the burning bush. God again revealed himself to Moses on that mountain, giving him the law (including the Ten Commandments; Exod 20:1–23:19) and directions for building the Tabernacle. But when Moses came down from the mountain, he found that the people had already deserted the true God by worshiping a gold calf (Exod 32). Moses threw down and broke the two tablets of the law and rallied the Levites to execute some of the offenders. After praying for the people, he received a new copy of the law and led the people in building the Tabernacle.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led a grumbling, rebellious, and distrustful people through the wilderness. Even his own brother and sister challenged his leadership, using his marriage to a Cushite woman as an excuse (Num 12). Moses responded with great humility, and God affirmed that Moses was his spokesman and confidant.<\/p>\n<p>Moses was a great man, but not a perfect one. When the people stretched his patience by complaining about a lack of water, Moses failed to follow God’s instructions and struck a certain rock rather than speaking to it (Num 20:1-13). His actions failed to demonstrate God’s holiness, and by what he said, Moses implied that he had brought the water by his own power (Num 20:10; cp. Ps 106:32-33). As a result, God did not allow him to enter the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>Before his death, Moses delivered a final sermon, known to us as the book of Deuteronomy. The first generation of Israelites, who had come out of Egypt, had died in the wilderness, so Moses was addressing a new generation. Moses renewed the covenant with this generation, reminded them of its terms, and encouraged them to obey it and serve the Lord alone.<\/p>\n<p>After giving this sermon and before Israel entered Canaan, Moses climbed Pisgah Peak on Mount Nebo, where he died. “There has never been another prophet in Israel like Moses, whom the <span>Lord<\/span> knew face to face” (Deut 34:10). Only Jesus surpassed Moses as a mediator between God and human beings (Acts 3:17-26; Heb 3).<\/p>\n<p>Moses is mentioned in the New Testament more than any other Old Testament figure, and he appeared at Jesus’ transfiguration. The New Testament emphasizes his role as lawgiver and draws from Moses’ experiences to show patterns of life under the new covenant. Like Moses, Jesus was rescued as an infant from the evil designs of a human despot (Matt 2:13-18). Jesus’ proclamation of a new law in his Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5–7) parallels the giving of the law at Sinai and presents Jesus as the authoritative interpreter of God’s will. The letter to the Hebrews compares Christ with Moses, while Paul’s letter to the Galatians and the Gospel of John contrast the law of Moses with a believer’s new relationship with God (see John 1:17; Gal 3:1-5; Heb 3:5-6; 9:11–10:18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 2:1-22; 3:1–19:25; 20:19-21; 24:1-18; 31:18; 32:1–34:35; 39:42-43; 40:16; Lev 8:1-36; 10:1-20; 24:10-23; Num 7:1-11, 89; 9:1-14; 10:29–14:45; 15:32-36; 16:1–17:13; 20:1-29; 21:4-9; 25:1-5; 27:1-23; 31:1–32:33; 33:1-2; Deut 1:1-5; 31:1–34:12; 1 Chr 23:13-17; Pss 77:20; 90:1-17; 103:7; 105:26-27; 106:32-33; Mark 9:2-13; Acts 7:17-44; 1 Cor 10:1-14; 2 Cor 3:7-18; Gal 3:19; Heb 3:1-19; 8:5; 9:19-22; 11:23-28; 12:18-29<\/p>","summary_ro":"Moses Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture. The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Mos...","summary_en":"Moses Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture. The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Mos...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":123854,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Moses","title_en":"Moses","content_ro":"<h3>Moses<\/h3>\n<p>Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Moses’ mother, Jochebed, entrusted her infant son to God and set him afloat in the Nile in a reed basket. Pharaoh’s daughter found him and took him into the palace to raise as her own child (Exod 2:3-10).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known about Moses’ upbringing. Jewish tradition holds that he received both administrative and military training in Pharaoh’s household. When he was about forty years old, he killed an Egyptian to rescue a Hebrew slave, and then he fled to Midian (2:11-15; cp. Acts 7:23-29). There he rescued some young women who were being harassed as they watered their flocks. Their father (Jethro) invited him home. Moses married one of the women, Zipporah, and began a family as he cared for his father-in-law’s flocks.<\/p>\n<p>About forty years later, God revealed himself to Moses in a burning bush and commissioned Moses to return to Egypt to rescue his people from slavery (Exod 3:1–4:17). Moses hesitated, fearful that the Israelites would not accept him as their leader. So God revealed to Moses his covenant name, Yahweh, and assigned Aaron as Moses’ spokesman.<\/p>\n<p>Moses and Aaron went to Egypt and confronted Pharaoh, who stubbornly resisted Moses' demand that he free the Israelite slaves. Moses then announced a series of plagues, which eventually convinced Pharaoh to let the Israelites leave. After they had left Egypt, Pharaoh changed his mind and pursued them to the edge of the Red Sea. God enabled the Israelites to cross safely to the other side by dividing the waters; the pursuing Egyptian army was destroyed when the waters closed over them.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led Israel to Mount Sinai, where he had encountered God at the burning bush. God again revealed himself to Moses on that mountain, giving him the law (including the Ten Commandments; Exod 20:1–23:19) and directions for building the Tabernacle. But when Moses came down from the mountain, he found that the people had already deserted the true God by worshiping a gold calf (Exod 32). Moses threw down and broke the two tablets of the law and rallied the Levites to execute some of the offenders. After praying for the people, he received a new copy of the law and led the people in building the Tabernacle.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led a grumbling, rebellious, and distrustful people through the wilderness. Even his own brother and sister challenged his leadership, using his marriage to a Cushite woman as an excuse (Num 12). Moses responded with great humility, and God affirmed that Moses was his spokesman and confidant.<\/p>\n<p>Moses was a great man, but not a perfect one. When the people stretched his patience by complaining about a lack of water, Moses failed to follow God’s instructions and struck a certain rock rather than speaking to it (Num 20:1-13). His actions failed to demonstrate God’s holiness, and by what he said, Moses implied that he had brought the water by his own power (Num 20:10; cp. Ps 106:32-33). As a result, God did not allow him to enter the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>Before his death, Moses delivered a final sermon, known to us as the book of Deuteronomy. The first generation of Israelites, who had come out of Egypt, had died in the wilderness, so Moses was addressing a new generation. Moses renewed the covenant with this generation, reminded them of its terms, and encouraged them to obey it and serve the Lord alone.<\/p>\n<p>After giving this sermon and before Israel entered Canaan, Moses climbed Pisgah Peak on Mount Nebo, where he died. “There has never been another prophet in Israel like Moses, whom the <span>Lord<\/span> knew face to face” (Deut 34:10). Only Jesus surpassed Moses as a mediator between God and human beings (Acts 3:17-26; Heb 3).<\/p>\n<p>Moses is mentioned in the New Testament more than any other Old Testament figure, and he appeared at Jesus’ transfiguration. The New Testament emphasizes his role as lawgiver and draws from Moses’ experiences to show patterns of life under the new covenant. Like Moses, Jesus was rescued as an infant from the evil designs of a human despot (Matt 2:13-18). Jesus’ proclamation of a new law in his Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5–7) parallels the giving of the law at Sinai and presents Jesus as the authoritative interpreter of God’s will. The letter to the Hebrews compares Christ with Moses, while Paul’s letter to the Galatians and the Gospel of John contrast the law of Moses with a believer’s new relationship with God (see John 1:17; Gal 3:1-5; Heb 3:5-6; 9:11–10:18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 2:1-22; 3:1–19:25; 20:19-21; 24:1-18; 31:18; 32:1–34:35; 39:42-43; 40:16; Lev 8:1-36; 10:1-20; 24:10-23; Num 7:1-11, 89; 9:1-14; 10:29–14:45; 15:32-36; 16:1–17:13; 20:1-29; 21:4-9; 25:1-5; 27:1-23; 31:1–32:33; 33:1-2; Deut 1:1-5; 31:1–34:12; 1 Chr 23:13-17; Pss 77:20; 90:1-17; 103:7; 105:26-27; 106:32-33; Mark 9:2-13; Acts 7:17-44; 1 Cor 10:1-14; 2 Cor 3:7-18; Gal 3:19; Heb 3:1-19; 8:5; 9:19-22; 11:23-28; 12:18-29<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Moses<\/h3>\n<p>Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Moses’ mother, Jochebed, entrusted her infant son to God and set him afloat in the Nile in a reed basket. Pharaoh’s daughter found him and took him into the palace to raise as her own child (Exod 2:3-10).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known about Moses’ upbringing. Jewish tradition holds that he received both administrative and military training in Pharaoh’s household. When he was about forty years old, he killed an Egyptian to rescue a Hebrew slave, and then he fled to Midian (2:11-15; cp. Acts 7:23-29). There he rescued some young women who were being harassed as they watered their flocks. Their father (Jethro) invited him home. Moses married one of the women, Zipporah, and began a family as he cared for his father-in-law’s flocks.<\/p>\n<p>About forty years later, God revealed himself to Moses in a burning bush and commissioned Moses to return to Egypt to rescue his people from slavery (Exod 3:1–4:17). Moses hesitated, fearful that the Israelites would not accept him as their leader. So God revealed to Moses his covenant name, Yahweh, and assigned Aaron as Moses’ spokesman.<\/p>\n<p>Moses and Aaron went to Egypt and confronted Pharaoh, who stubbornly resisted Moses' demand that he free the Israelite slaves. Moses then announced a series of plagues, which eventually convinced Pharaoh to let the Israelites leave. After they had left Egypt, Pharaoh changed his mind and pursued them to the edge of the Red Sea. God enabled the Israelites to cross safely to the other side by dividing the waters; the pursuing Egyptian army was destroyed when the waters closed over them.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led Israel to Mount Sinai, where he had encountered God at the burning bush. God again revealed himself to Moses on that mountain, giving him the law (including the Ten Commandments; Exod 20:1–23:19) and directions for building the Tabernacle. But when Moses came down from the mountain, he found that the people had already deserted the true God by worshiping a gold calf (Exod 32). Moses threw down and broke the two tablets of the law and rallied the Levites to execute some of the offenders. After praying for the people, he received a new copy of the law and led the people in building the Tabernacle.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led a grumbling, rebellious, and distrustful people through the wilderness. Even his own brother and sister challenged his leadership, using his marriage to a Cushite woman as an excuse (Num 12). Moses responded with great humility, and God affirmed that Moses was his spokesman and confidant.<\/p>\n<p>Moses was a great man, but not a perfect one. When the people stretched his patience by complaining about a lack of water, Moses failed to follow God’s instructions and struck a certain rock rather than speaking to it (Num 20:1-13). His actions failed to demonstrate God’s holiness, and by what he said, Moses implied that he had brought the water by his own power (Num 20:10; cp. Ps 106:32-33). As a result, God did not allow him to enter the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>Before his death, Moses delivered a final sermon, known to us as the book of Deuteronomy. The first generation of Israelites, who had come out of Egypt, had died in the wilderness, so Moses was addressing a new generation. Moses renewed the covenant with this generation, reminded them of its terms, and encouraged them to obey it and serve the Lord alone.<\/p>\n<p>After giving this sermon and before Israel entered Canaan, Moses climbed Pisgah Peak on Mount Nebo, where he died. “There has never been another prophet in Israel like Moses, whom the <span>Lord<\/span> knew face to face” (Deut 34:10). Only Jesus surpassed Moses as a mediator between God and human beings (Acts 3:17-26; Heb 3).<\/p>\n<p>Moses is mentioned in the New Testament more than any other Old Testament figure, and he appeared at Jesus’ transfiguration. The New Testament emphasizes his role as lawgiver and draws from Moses’ experiences to show patterns of life under the new covenant. Like Moses, Jesus was rescued as an infant from the evil designs of a human despot (Matt 2:13-18). Jesus’ proclamation of a new law in his Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5–7) parallels the giving of the law at Sinai and presents Jesus as the authoritative interpreter of God’s will. The letter to the Hebrews compares Christ with Moses, while Paul’s letter to the Galatians and the Gospel of John contrast the law of Moses with a believer’s new relationship with God (see John 1:17; Gal 3:1-5; Heb 3:5-6; 9:11–10:18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 2:1-22; 3:1–19:25; 20:19-21; 24:1-18; 31:18; 32:1–34:35; 39:42-43; 40:16; Lev 8:1-36; 10:1-20; 24:10-23; Num 7:1-11, 89; 9:1-14; 10:29–14:45; 15:32-36; 16:1–17:13; 20:1-29; 21:4-9; 25:1-5; 27:1-23; 31:1–32:33; 33:1-2; Deut 1:1-5; 31:1–34:12; 1 Chr 23:13-17; Pss 77:20; 90:1-17; 103:7; 105:26-27; 106:32-33; Mark 9:2-13; Acts 7:17-44; 1 Cor 10:1-14; 2 Cor 3:7-18; Gal 3:19; Heb 3:1-19; 8:5; 9:19-22; 11:23-28; 12:18-29<\/p>","summary_ro":"Moses Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture. The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Mos...","summary_en":"Moses Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture. The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Mos...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":22688,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Biblical Concept of Law","title_en":"Biblical Concept of Law","content_ro":"<h3>LAW, Biblical Concept of<\/h3>\n<p>God’s means of consecrating his people to himself. The nature and content of “law” may change, but the goal remains the same: maturity and conformity to the image of God.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Historical Context<\/p>\n<p>• Law in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East<\/p>\n<p>• Old Testament Laws<\/p>\n<p>• Purposes of the Law<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalContext\">Historical Context<\/p>\n<p>When man was created in God’s image, he received glory, rule, and provision for his daily sustenance from the Creator-King (Gn 1:27-30). However, in his exalted status as ruler over God’s creation on earth, man had to prove his loyalty to the Lord. For this purpose God set up a simple test: the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Man was prohibited from eating the fruit of that tree (2:17). His disobedience marked him as unfit for fellowship with the great King. He was rebellious and by nature full of treachery, as the subsequent accounts of Cain (4:1-16), the generation of the Flood (6:1-13), Ham and Canaan (9:18-26; 10:6-20), and the Tower of Babel (11:1-9) demonstrate.<\/p>\n<p>Yet in the midst of all this the Lord graciously called Abraham. He promised to bless him, his seed, and the families of the earth that would join in a common expression of faith (Gn 12:2-3; 17:4-7). Abraham responded to God in faith (15:6), willingly observed the ritual of circumcision as a sign of the covenant (17:10; cf. 21:4), and walked before God with integrity of heart (17:1). Abraham subsequently learned that God had sovereignly and graciously chosen him with the purpose that Abraham’s family might distinguish itself from the nations “by doing righteousness and justice” (18:19). The Lord was pleased with his servant Abraham, who, though he had not received detailed laws, was a man of integrity. His heart was right with God, so that he willingly did what God commanded.<\/p>\n<p>The father of faith was the father of the faithful; the Lord testified that Abraham “obeyed me and kept my requirements, my commands, my decrees and my laws” (Gn 26:5, <span>niv<\/span>). His faith resulted in the fruits of righteousness (Jas 2:21-24).<\/p>\n<p>However, Israel, blessed by the Lord in the increase of descendants, the exodus, the crossing of the Red Sea, and his presence, did not respond to him in faith. They murmured and complained at Mt Sinai, at Kadesh-barnea, and in the plains of Moab. They proved themselves to be a rebellious and stiff-necked people (Ex 32:9; 33:3, 5; 34:9; Dt 9:6, 13). Though they had shown their character, the Lord was faithful to Abraham by covenanting himself to them. Israel became his people, his royal priesthood, his holy nation (Ex 19:5-6; Dt 26:18-19). He gave Israel the Ten Commandments, the law, and the covenant, symbolized by the two tablets of the testimony (Ex 32:15-16). Even after Moses had broken them in anger because of the people’s idolatrous worship of the golden calf, the Lord renewed his covenant by writing again the words of the covenant (34:28). On one hand, the context in which the law was given reflects God’s grace and forbearance with Israel’s sins (vv 6-7) and his determination to use Israel in the unfolding of his plan of redemption for the world. On the other hand, the context reflects Israel’s immaturity and stubbornness. Therefore, the law in the OT has positive and negative purposes.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LawintheOldTestament\">Law in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT has many words for God’s law. The most general word is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Torah<\/span><em>,<\/em> which signifies instruction of any kind: religious and secular, written and oral, divine and human. Law in Israel was God’s law, mediated through Moses (Ex 20:19; Dt 5:23-27). Because Israel rejected the direct revelation of God’s oracles, the law was mediated through Moses the servant of God (Jn 1:17).<\/p>\n<p>Synonyms for law are, in various translations, word (cf. Ex 24:3; 34:27), judgment (cf. Ex 24:3), decree (cf. Nm 30:16; Dt 4:1), ordinance (cf. Nm 9:12, 14; Dt 6:2), command(ment) (cf. Dt 6:1, 25), statutes (Lv 3:17; 10:11), precepts (a Hebrew word used only in Psalms; cf. 119:4, 15, 27, 40, 45, 56, 63, 69, 78, 87, 93, 94, 100, 104, 110, 128, 134, 141, 159, 168, 173), stipulations, requirements, testimonies (cf. Dt 4:45; 6:20; 1 Kgs 2:3), precept (a Hebrew term not in the Pentateuch; cf. Ps 119:15), or simply the “way(s)” (cf. 1 Kgs 2:3; Pss 18:21; 25:9; 37:34).<\/p>\n<p>These words form a semantic field, and it is far from easy to distinguish clearly among the various forms of laws. Generally “the words” pertain to the duties of man toward God, especially the Ten Commandments (Ex 20:1; 34:27). The “judgments” contain civil regulations and duties to one’s fellows and to the social environment (21:1–23:9); these are often in the form of “if . . . then. . . .” In Leviticus and in cultic formulations the word “ordinances” has the technical sense of cultic regulations—the ceremonial laws. However, in other contexts, especially in a series of synonyms for law, it signifies any expectation or regulation. The “commandments” are those regulations given by a higher authority. Though the OT has many words for law, the connotation of one word is often indistinguishable from that of other words, especially in series such as “the decrees and laws” (Dt 4:1, 5; 5:1), “the commands, decrees and laws” (6:1), “walk in his ways, and keep his decrees and commands, his laws and requirements, as written in the Law of Moses” (1 Kgs 2:3, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The motivation for keeping the divine law lies in the acts and presence of the Lord. The prologue to the Decalogue reminds us of God’s mighty acts: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span> your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage” (Ex 20:2, <span>rsv<\/span>). In the historic acts of Israel’s redemption, revelation at Mt Sinai, and consecration of Israel to be his people, he involved himself with Israel as a “father.” He adopted Israel to sonship and consecrated them; that is, he declared them holy (Ex 19:6; 31:13; Lv 20:8; 22:32; cf. Rom 9:4). Sometimes the two concepts of redemption and consecration are placed together, but whether they are or not, they are inseparable: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span>, who makes you holy” (Lv 22:32b, <span>niv<\/span>). The ground of obedience can be stated simply by an appeal to God’s name: “I am Yahweh” (cf. Lv 18:6, 21, 30; 19:10, 14, 16, 18, 28, 30-31, 34, 36-37). The requisite of practical holiness is also based on the experience of God’s presence. The Lord commanded Israel to be holy because he is holy (Lv 11:44-45; 19:2). The “holy one of Israel” dwelt in the midst of his people (Ex 25:8; 29:45; Nm 5:3; 35:34).<\/p>\n<p>How could rebellious Israel grasp what God required, if it were not by precise moral, social, civil, and cultic regulations? The Lord had observed that they did not have “the heart” to serve him as a covenant-loyal people (Dt 5:29). By Israel’s very nature, it could not develop an adequate moral and cultic system to please God. Because of the people’s hardness of heart, God had to reveal (i.e., “spell out”) his will.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IsraeliteLawandtheAncientNearEast\">Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s law reflected the practices of its ancient Near Eastern context. Ancient Babylonian law codes (Eshnunna, Hammurabi) show similarities with the biblical codes. The similarities go beyond similarity of cases and include legal formulations (casuistic law). Israelite law is distinct in that it is divine law. Moses is the mediator and not the promulgator of the law, as was the practice of a king who, like Hammurabi, put into force a legal code. The Lord himself gave Israel its laws (cf. Dt 4:5-8). The laws in the ancient Near East dealt with the ordering of society. But Israel’s laws were given to regulate every aspect of life: personal, familial, social, and cultic. The laws were to teach Israel to distinguish between holy and profane, between clean and unclean, and between just and unjust.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentLaws\">Old Testament Laws<\/p>\n<p>The legal corpus of the OT is not given in one book or in one section. Moreover, the laws reflect the development from the desert context (Exodus) to the context of the land (Deuteronomy). The OT legal material is complex, full of variations and duplications. It is found in Exodus (chs 20–24; 25–31), Leviticus, Numbers (chs 3–6; 8–10; 15; 18; 19; 28–30), and Deuteronomy (chs 5–26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Ten Commandments<\/h5>\n<p>The commandments are simply designated as “the words” of God (Ex 20:1). They appear in Exodus 20:1-17 and in Deuteronomy 5:6-21, but minor variations and individual commandments occur in other contexts (e.g., Ex 34:14, 17, 21; Lv 19:1-8; Dt 27:15-16). As a part of the covenant, the commandments were first addressed to Israel; they now form the basis of morality in Christianity. The abiding relevance of the moral law is clear from the NT. Our Lord established his authority as interpreter of all the commandments (Mt 5:17-48; 12:1-14; 23:23-24). He summarized the law in terms of love for God and man (cf. Mt 22:37-40; Mk 12:28-34; Lk 10:27; cf. Rom 13:8-9; Gal 5:14). Since he is also the Lord of the Sabbath, the Sabbath cannot be divorced from the other commandments (Mt 12:8). The apostle Paul also upheld the law, as his “ethics of the Spirit” reflects an internalization of the law of God in the hearts of believers (cf. Rom 8:1-17; 12:1–15:13; 1 Cor 2:6-16; 5:1-8; 10:23–11:1; Gal 5:13–6:10; Eph 4:17–6:9; Phil 2:1-18; Col 3:1–4:6; 1 Thes 4:1-12; 5:12-24; 2 Thes 3:6-15; 1 Tm 6:3-10; Ti 3:1-11).<\/p>\n<p>The commandments were written on both sides of the two tablets by the Lord (Ex 32:15-16). It is unclear whether the tablets were duplicate copies, how the commandments were divided, and how the commandments were numbered. They were kept in the ark of the covenant as a testimony to the covenant (40:20).<\/p>\n<h5>The Book of the Covenant (Ex 20:23–23:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The purpose of the covenant code was to exemplify and to set into motion the legal machinery by which Israel as a nation could reflect God’s concern for justice, love, peace, and the value of life. The laws in the Book of the Covenant are mainly of the casuistic type. They regulate life in an agricultural society with servants, donkeys, bulls, oxen, sheep, and fields of grain. The regulations pertain to relations with women (including widows), aliens, orphans; to legal concerns (liability, damages, ownership); as well as to religious obligations (altar, Sabbath). Often the law requires restitution, but restitution is not the rule when human life is involved (Ex 21:12-29; 22:2-3), especially when it involves one’s family (21:15-17, 22-25). The penal code attached to the case laws makes clear the value of human life, which is protected by the <em>lex talionis<\/em> (“law of retaliation”). The <em>lex talionis<\/em> does not point to a lack of forgiveness under the OT but rather was intended to be a legal principle giving coherence and justice to a society. The Book of the Covenant explicates by means of principles and cases how Israel must live together as a nation embracing the law of God and applying it <em>justly<\/em> (without discrimination or twisting of rights), <em>lovingly<\/em> (with a concern for the parties involved), and <em>peaceably.<\/em><\/p>\n<h5>The Priestly Law<\/h5>\n<p>God’s concern for holiness and purity comes to expression in the priestly laws (Ex 25–31; 35–40; Lv 1–27; Nm 4–10). The regulations pertain to the construction of the tabernacle, the consecration and ordination of priests, the offerings and sacrifices, rules of purity, the holy days, and vows.<\/p>\n<p>The tabernacle was set in the middle of Israel’s camp in the wilderness. It symbolized the presence of God with his people. The priests and Levites were encamped around the tabernacle to serve and protect God’s holiness. All the tribes were situated around the tabernacle, and though the members of the tribes did not have access to all parts of the tabernacle, they had to be ritually clean to live in the camp. Anyone who was ritually defiled (Lv 13:46; Nm 5:1-3) or had sinned grievously was put outside the camp (Lv 24:10-23; Nm 15:32-36). This regulation even included objects that had become defiled (Lv 8:17; 9:11).<\/p>\n<p>By means of prescribed offerings and sacrifices (Lv 1–7; 16; Nm 15:1-31; 28), God assured Israel, individually and corporately, of forgiveness when it had unwittingly sinned. The offerings and sacrifices concretely embodied the purpose of the offerer, whether forgiveness, dedication, or fellowship.<\/p>\n<p>The priests and Levites taught the law of God (Dt 31:9-13), applied its regulations, and served in courts (17:8-13).<\/p>\n<h5>The Holiness Code (Lv 17–26)<\/h5>\n<p>The holiness code forms a significant part of the book of Leviticus. Here Moses addressed all of Israel (cf. Lv 17:2; 18:2; 19:2; 20:2; 21:24; 23:2; 24:2; 25:2; 26:46; 27:2).<\/p>\n<p>The laws are in the form of prohibitions and direct commands. They pertain to the place of sacrifice and the prohibition of eating meat with blood in it (ch 17); the prohibition of sexual relations with specified family members (ch 18); and regulations promoting godliness, holiness, justice, and love in society (ch 19). The penal code applies penalties to those who sin against the regulations (ch 20; 24:10-23). Chapters 21–24 apply the cultic regulations to the priests and to all Israelites. The institutions of the sabbatical year and the Year of Jubilee regulate the remission of debts, freedom of people, and restitution of land (ch 25).<\/p>\n<p>The holiness code spells out the qualities required of a holy people: devotion to God (offerings, sacrifices, priests) and love for man (Lv 19:18b) demonstrated in concern for justice, peace, freedom, the value of human life, and a concern for the family. Many of the laws reflect the spirit of the Decalogue (ch 19).<\/p>\n<p>Both promises and curses are attached to the holiness code (ch 26). The curses predict exile as a consequence of breaking the laws. But always underlying the laws and penalties is the grace of the Lord, who promises freely to forgive the people’s sins and to renew the broken covenant (26:44-45).<\/p>\n<h5>Laws of Deuteronomy<\/h5>\n<p>The Deuteronomic laws are explications and new applications of the Book of the Covenant in view of Israel’s new historical situation. Israel was about to enter the Promised Land when Moses outlined to them the law of God (Dt 1:5). The impersonal element of the Book of the Covenant is here transformed by personal appeal. Moses strongly appeals to Israel to be loyal to the Lord, the covenant, and the covenantal stipulations. The Deuteronomic laws envision the people in the land of promise, with a central sanctuary (12:5, 11-18; 14:23; 15:20; 16:5-7, 16, 21; 17:8; 18:6; 26:2; 31:11) and with a king (17:14-20). The blessings and the curses motivate covenant loyalty (ch 28). However, Israel is also here assured that even if it breaks God’s law, the Lord remains gracious and forgiving.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposesoftheLaw\">Purposes of the Law<\/p>\n<p>The law revealed at Mt Sinai was intended to lead Israel closer to God. Rebellious though they were, God used the law as his righteous instrument to teach, in a very specific way, what sin is (cf. Rom 5:20; 7:7-8) and how they should walk on a path that kept them undefiled by sin and holy to the Lord. The law was the teacher and the keeper of Israel (Gal 3:24). The detailed explications of the laws in all areas of life (work, society, family, cult, and nation) had an important place in God’s dealings with Israel. Israel was a nation in a special land, with a theocratic government, and was in need of a legislative corpus. Moreover, Israel’s condition at Mt Sinai was such that it could not receive direct revelation. The revelation had to be mediated through Moses. It had to be set forth in detail because Israel had no intuitive grasp of what the revelation of God’s holiness, justice, righteousness, love, and forebearance required of them. They had adopted Egyptian ways and had to learn the divine will by revelation. However, Moses and the prophets emphasize that the purpose of the law is not strict adherence to the law for its own sake (legalism) or for a reward (Pharisaism). Keeping the law is an act of devotion to God, for the sake of God. Our Lord confirmed the purpose of the law: to establish a dynamic way of life in which one continually seeks God’s kingdom and his righteousness (Mt 6:33).<\/p>\n<p>The law of God is his means of sanctification. He consecrated Israel by an act of grace, and he required Israel to remain holy. Jesus confirmed those uses of the law whereby one may know his sinfulness and by which he may be driven to Christ. On the cross our Lord carried the penalties of the law, fulfilled in a greater way the tabernacle\/temple presence of God, fulfilled the Father’s expectations of atonement, and demonstrated the love of the Father. He, the Son and greater than Moses, gave the essence of the law in the summary of God’s requirements: love of God and love of neighbor (Mt 23:23-24; Lk 11:42-44). Jesus taught that the purpose of obedience is not primarily to receive a reward but to serve as salt (Mt 5:13) and light (Mt 5:14-16; cf. Eph 4:17–5:20), and to bear fruit (Jn 15:1-17). The purpose of the law of God is the gradual transformation of the children of God to reflect the image of the Son (Rom 8:29; 2 Cor 3:18; Col 3:10), to be an imitation of the Father (Eph 5:1-2), and to be filled with the Spirit of God (Gal 5:18, 22-24). For this purpose Jesus gave us the Beatitudes and the Sermon on the Mount, which summarize the intent of the teaching of Moses and the prophets (Mt 5–7).<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the law is to transform regenerated believers into maturity. Spiritual maturity is not a privilege that was reserved for believers after Christ; OT saints also walked with God (Enoch, Gn 5:22-24; Noah, 6:9; Abraham, 17:1). These were mature men who lived with integrity in the presence of God (cf. Gn 17:1; Dt 18:13; Pss 15:1-2; 18:26; 101:2, 6; 119:80; Prv 11:5).<\/p>\n<p>Maturity, or integrity, is that response to God whereby the believer no longer needs to live by individual stipulations or in fear of mistakes and sins of omission, but delights in doing the Lord’s will (Pss 1:2; 112:1). Since the coming of Christ and Pentecost, the Holy Spirit has been poured out on every believer. He has come not only to internalize the law of God (Jer 31:33) but also to help us develop Christian maturity by giving the fruits of godliness in greater fullness (Gal 5:22-24). Whereas maturity and freedom were experienced by some OT saints, it is God’s gift to all his children in Christ (Acts 2:39; 1 Cor 12:13). The purpose is still the same, “so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped [mature] for every good work” (2 Tm 3:17, <span>niv<\/span>), but the means to accomplish this and the status of the child of God is so much better since Pentecost.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Criminal Law and Punishment; Galatians, Letter to the; Hammurabi, Law Code of; Justification; Romans, Letter to the; Commandments, The Ten; Torah; Tradition.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LAW, Biblical Concept of<\/h3>\n<p>God’s means of consecrating his people to himself. The nature and content of “law” may change, but the goal remains the same: maturity and conformity to the image of God.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Historical Context<\/p>\n<p>• Law in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East<\/p>\n<p>• Old Testament Laws<\/p>\n<p>• Purposes of the Law<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalContext\">Historical Context<\/p>\n<p>When man was created in God’s image, he received glory, rule, and provision for his daily sustenance from the Creator-King (Gn 1:27-30). However, in his exalted status as ruler over God’s creation on earth, man had to prove his loyalty to the Lord. For this purpose God set up a simple test: the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Man was prohibited from eating the fruit of that tree (2:17). His disobedience marked him as unfit for fellowship with the great King. He was rebellious and by nature full of treachery, as the subsequent accounts of Cain (4:1-16), the generation of the Flood (6:1-13), Ham and Canaan (9:18-26; 10:6-20), and the Tower of Babel (11:1-9) demonstrate.<\/p>\n<p>Yet in the midst of all this the Lord graciously called Abraham. He promised to bless him, his seed, and the families of the earth that would join in a common expression of faith (Gn 12:2-3; 17:4-7). Abraham responded to God in faith (15:6), willingly observed the ritual of circumcision as a sign of the covenant (17:10; cf. 21:4), and walked before God with integrity of heart (17:1). Abraham subsequently learned that God had sovereignly and graciously chosen him with the purpose that Abraham’s family might distinguish itself from the nations “by doing righteousness and justice” (18:19). The Lord was pleased with his servant Abraham, who, though he had not received detailed laws, was a man of integrity. His heart was right with God, so that he willingly did what God commanded.<\/p>\n<p>The father of faith was the father of the faithful; the Lord testified that Abraham “obeyed me and kept my requirements, my commands, my decrees and my laws” (Gn 26:5, <span>niv<\/span>). His faith resulted in the fruits of righteousness (Jas 2:21-24).<\/p>\n<p>However, Israel, blessed by the Lord in the increase of descendants, the exodus, the crossing of the Red Sea, and his presence, did not respond to him in faith. They murmured and complained at Mt Sinai, at Kadesh-barnea, and in the plains of Moab. They proved themselves to be a rebellious and stiff-necked people (Ex 32:9; 33:3, 5; 34:9; Dt 9:6, 13). Though they had shown their character, the Lord was faithful to Abraham by covenanting himself to them. Israel became his people, his royal priesthood, his holy nation (Ex 19:5-6; Dt 26:18-19). He gave Israel the Ten Commandments, the law, and the covenant, symbolized by the two tablets of the testimony (Ex 32:15-16). Even after Moses had broken them in anger because of the people’s idolatrous worship of the golden calf, the Lord renewed his covenant by writing again the words of the covenant (34:28). On one hand, the context in which the law was given reflects God’s grace and forbearance with Israel’s sins (vv 6-7) and his determination to use Israel in the unfolding of his plan of redemption for the world. On the other hand, the context reflects Israel’s immaturity and stubbornness. Therefore, the law in the OT has positive and negative purposes.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LawintheOldTestament\">Law in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT has many words for God’s law. The most general word is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Torah<\/span><em>,<\/em> which signifies instruction of any kind: religious and secular, written and oral, divine and human. Law in Israel was God’s law, mediated through Moses (Ex 20:19; Dt 5:23-27). Because Israel rejected the direct revelation of God’s oracles, the law was mediated through Moses the servant of God (Jn 1:17).<\/p>\n<p>Synonyms for law are, in various translations, word (cf. Ex 24:3; 34:27), judgment (cf. Ex 24:3), decree (cf. Nm 30:16; Dt 4:1), ordinance (cf. Nm 9:12, 14; Dt 6:2), command(ment) (cf. Dt 6:1, 25), statutes (Lv 3:17; 10:11), precepts (a Hebrew word used only in Psalms; cf. 119:4, 15, 27, 40, 45, 56, 63, 69, 78, 87, 93, 94, 100, 104, 110, 128, 134, 141, 159, 168, 173), stipulations, requirements, testimonies (cf. Dt 4:45; 6:20; 1 Kgs 2:3), precept (a Hebrew term not in the Pentateuch; cf. Ps 119:15), or simply the “way(s)” (cf. 1 Kgs 2:3; Pss 18:21; 25:9; 37:34).<\/p>\n<p>These words form a semantic field, and it is far from easy to distinguish clearly among the various forms of laws. Generally “the words” pertain to the duties of man toward God, especially the Ten Commandments (Ex 20:1; 34:27). The “judgments” contain civil regulations and duties to one’s fellows and to the social environment (21:1–23:9); these are often in the form of “if . . . then. . . .” In Leviticus and in cultic formulations the word “ordinances” has the technical sense of cultic regulations—the ceremonial laws. However, in other contexts, especially in a series of synonyms for law, it signifies any expectation or regulation. The “commandments” are those regulations given by a higher authority. Though the OT has many words for law, the connotation of one word is often indistinguishable from that of other words, especially in series such as “the decrees and laws” (Dt 4:1, 5; 5:1), “the commands, decrees and laws” (6:1), “walk in his ways, and keep his decrees and commands, his laws and requirements, as written in the Law of Moses” (1 Kgs 2:3, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The motivation for keeping the divine law lies in the acts and presence of the Lord. The prologue to the Decalogue reminds us of God’s mighty acts: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span> your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage” (Ex 20:2, <span>rsv<\/span>). In the historic acts of Israel’s redemption, revelation at Mt Sinai, and consecration of Israel to be his people, he involved himself with Israel as a “father.” He adopted Israel to sonship and consecrated them; that is, he declared them holy (Ex 19:6; 31:13; Lv 20:8; 22:32; cf. Rom 9:4). Sometimes the two concepts of redemption and consecration are placed together, but whether they are or not, they are inseparable: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span>, who makes you holy” (Lv 22:32b, <span>niv<\/span>). The ground of obedience can be stated simply by an appeal to God’s name: “I am Yahweh” (cf. Lv 18:6, 21, 30; 19:10, 14, 16, 18, 28, 30-31, 34, 36-37). The requisite of practical holiness is also based on the experience of God’s presence. The Lord commanded Israel to be holy because he is holy (Lv 11:44-45; 19:2). The “holy one of Israel” dwelt in the midst of his people (Ex 25:8; 29:45; Nm 5:3; 35:34).<\/p>\n<p>How could rebellious Israel grasp what God required, if it were not by precise moral, social, civil, and cultic regulations? The Lord had observed that they did not have “the heart” to serve him as a covenant-loyal people (Dt 5:29). By Israel’s very nature, it could not develop an adequate moral and cultic system to please God. Because of the people’s hardness of heart, God had to reveal (i.e., “spell out”) his will.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IsraeliteLawandtheAncientNearEast\">Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s law reflected the practices of its ancient Near Eastern context. Ancient Babylonian law codes (Eshnunna, Hammurabi) show similarities with the biblical codes. The similarities go beyond similarity of cases and include legal formulations (casuistic law). Israelite law is distinct in that it is divine law. Moses is the mediator and not the promulgator of the law, as was the practice of a king who, like Hammurabi, put into force a legal code. The Lord himself gave Israel its laws (cf. Dt 4:5-8). The laws in the ancient Near East dealt with the ordering of society. But Israel’s laws were given to regulate every aspect of life: personal, familial, social, and cultic. The laws were to teach Israel to distinguish between holy and profane, between clean and unclean, and between just and unjust.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentLaws\">Old Testament Laws<\/p>\n<p>The legal corpus of the OT is not given in one book or in one section. Moreover, the laws reflect the development from the desert context (Exodus) to the context of the land (Deuteronomy). The OT legal material is complex, full of variations and duplications. It is found in Exodus (chs 20–24; 25–31), Leviticus, Numbers (chs 3–6; 8–10; 15; 18; 19; 28–30), and Deuteronomy (chs 5–26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Ten Commandments<\/h5>\n<p>The commandments are simply designated as “the words” of God (Ex 20:1). They appear in Exodus 20:1-17 and in Deuteronomy 5:6-21, but minor variations and individual commandments occur in other contexts (e.g., Ex 34:14, 17, 21; Lv 19:1-8; Dt 27:15-16). As a part of the covenant, the commandments were first addressed to Israel; they now form the basis of morality in Christianity. The abiding relevance of the moral law is clear from the NT. Our Lord established his authority as interpreter of all the commandments (Mt 5:17-48; 12:1-14; 23:23-24). He summarized the law in terms of love for God and man (cf. Mt 22:37-40; Mk 12:28-34; Lk 10:27; cf. Rom 13:8-9; Gal 5:14). Since he is also the Lord of the Sabbath, the Sabbath cannot be divorced from the other commandments (Mt 12:8). The apostle Paul also upheld the law, as his “ethics of the Spirit” reflects an internalization of the law of God in the hearts of believers (cf. Rom 8:1-17; 12:1–15:13; 1 Cor 2:6-16; 5:1-8; 10:23–11:1; Gal 5:13–6:10; Eph 4:17–6:9; Phil 2:1-18; Col 3:1–4:6; 1 Thes 4:1-12; 5:12-24; 2 Thes 3:6-15; 1 Tm 6:3-10; Ti 3:1-11).<\/p>\n<p>The commandments were written on both sides of the two tablets by the Lord (Ex 32:15-16). It is unclear whether the tablets were duplicate copies, how the commandments were divided, and how the commandments were numbered. They were kept in the ark of the covenant as a testimony to the covenant (40:20).<\/p>\n<h5>The Book of the Covenant (Ex 20:23–23:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The purpose of the covenant code was to exemplify and to set into motion the legal machinery by which Israel as a nation could reflect God’s concern for justice, love, peace, and the value of life. The laws in the Book of the Covenant are mainly of the casuistic type. They regulate life in an agricultural society with servants, donkeys, bulls, oxen, sheep, and fields of grain. The regulations pertain to relations with women (including widows), aliens, orphans; to legal concerns (liability, damages, ownership); as well as to religious obligations (altar, Sabbath). Often the law requires restitution, but restitution is not the rule when human life is involved (Ex 21:12-29; 22:2-3), especially when it involves one’s family (21:15-17, 22-25). The penal code attached to the case laws makes clear the value of human life, which is protected by the <em>lex talionis<\/em> (“law of retaliation”). The <em>lex talionis<\/em> does not point to a lack of forgiveness under the OT but rather was intended to be a legal principle giving coherence and justice to a society. The Book of the Covenant explicates by means of principles and cases how Israel must live together as a nation embracing the law of God and applying it <em>justly<\/em> (without discrimination or twisting of rights), <em>lovingly<\/em> (with a concern for the parties involved), and <em>peaceably.<\/em><\/p>\n<h5>The Priestly Law<\/h5>\n<p>God’s concern for holiness and purity comes to expression in the priestly laws (Ex 25–31; 35–40; Lv 1–27; Nm 4–10). The regulations pertain to the construction of the tabernacle, the consecration and ordination of priests, the offerings and sacrifices, rules of purity, the holy days, and vows.<\/p>\n<p>The tabernacle was set in the middle of Israel’s camp in the wilderness. It symbolized the presence of God with his people. The priests and Levites were encamped around the tabernacle to serve and protect God’s holiness. All the tribes were situated around the tabernacle, and though the members of the tribes did not have access to all parts of the tabernacle, they had to be ritually clean to live in the camp. Anyone who was ritually defiled (Lv 13:46; Nm 5:1-3) or had sinned grievously was put outside the camp (Lv 24:10-23; Nm 15:32-36). This regulation even included objects that had become defiled (Lv 8:17; 9:11).<\/p>\n<p>By means of prescribed offerings and sacrifices (Lv 1–7; 16; Nm 15:1-31; 28), God assured Israel, individually and corporately, of forgiveness when it had unwittingly sinned. The offerings and sacrifices concretely embodied the purpose of the offerer, whether forgiveness, dedication, or fellowship.<\/p>\n<p>The priests and Levites taught the law of God (Dt 31:9-13), applied its regulations, and served in courts (17:8-13).<\/p>\n<h5>The Holiness Code (Lv 17–26)<\/h5>\n<p>The holiness code forms a significant part of the book of Leviticus. Here Moses addressed all of Israel (cf. Lv 17:2; 18:2; 19:2; 20:2; 21:24; 23:2; 24:2; 25:2; 26:46; 27:2).<\/p>\n<p>The laws are in the form of prohibitions and direct commands. They pertain to the place of sacrifice and the prohibition of eating meat with blood in it (ch 17); the prohibition of sexual relations with specified family members (ch 18); and regulations promoting godliness, holiness, justice, and love in society (ch 19). The penal code applies penalties to those who sin against the regulations (ch 20; 24:10-23). Chapters 21–24 apply the cultic regulations to the priests and to all Israelites. The institutions of the sabbatical year and the Year of Jubilee regulate the remission of debts, freedom of people, and restitution of land (ch 25).<\/p>\n<p>The holiness code spells out the qualities required of a holy people: devotion to God (offerings, sacrifices, priests) and love for man (Lv 19:18b) demonstrated in concern for justice, peace, freedom, the value of human life, and a concern for the family. Many of the laws reflect the spirit of the Decalogue (ch 19).<\/p>\n<p>Both promises and curses are attached to the holiness code (ch 26). The curses predict exile as a consequence of breaking the laws. But always underlying the laws and penalties is the grace of the Lord, who promises freely to forgive the people’s sins and to renew the broken covenant (26:44-45).<\/p>\n<h5>Laws of Deuteronomy<\/h5>\n<p>The Deuteronomic laws are explications and new applications of the Book of the Covenant in view of Israel’s new historical situation. Israel was about to enter the Promised Land when Moses outlined to them the law of God (Dt 1:5). The impersonal element of the Book of the Covenant is here transformed by personal appeal. Moses strongly appeals to Israel to be loyal to the Lord, the covenant, and the covenantal stipulations. The Deuteronomic laws envision the people in the land of promise, with a central sanctuary (12:5, 11-18; 14:23; 15:20; 16:5-7, 16, 21; 17:8; 18:6; 26:2; 31:11) and with a king (17:14-20). The blessings and the curses motivate covenant loyalty (ch 28). However, Israel is also here assured that even if it breaks God’s law, the Lord remains gracious and forgiving.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposesoftheLaw\">Purposes of the Law<\/p>\n<p>The law revealed at Mt Sinai was intended to lead Israel closer to God. Rebellious though they were, God used the law as his righteous instrument to teach, in a very specific way, what sin is (cf. Rom 5:20; 7:7-8) and how they should walk on a path that kept them undefiled by sin and holy to the Lord. The law was the teacher and the keeper of Israel (Gal 3:24). The detailed explications of the laws in all areas of life (work, society, family, cult, and nation) had an important place in God’s dealings with Israel. Israel was a nation in a special land, with a theocratic government, and was in need of a legislative corpus. Moreover, Israel’s condition at Mt Sinai was such that it could not receive direct revelation. The revelation had to be mediated through Moses. It had to be set forth in detail because Israel had no intuitive grasp of what the revelation of God’s holiness, justice, righteousness, love, and forebearance required of them. They had adopted Egyptian ways and had to learn the divine will by revelation. However, Moses and the prophets emphasize that the purpose of the law is not strict adherence to the law for its own sake (legalism) or for a reward (Pharisaism). Keeping the law is an act of devotion to God, for the sake of God. Our Lord confirmed the purpose of the law: to establish a dynamic way of life in which one continually seeks God’s kingdom and his righteousness (Mt 6:33).<\/p>\n<p>The law of God is his means of sanctification. He consecrated Israel by an act of grace, and he required Israel to remain holy. Jesus confirmed those uses of the law whereby one may know his sinfulness and by which he may be driven to Christ. On the cross our Lord carried the penalties of the law, fulfilled in a greater way the tabernacle\/temple presence of God, fulfilled the Father’s expectations of atonement, and demonstrated the love of the Father. He, the Son and greater than Moses, gave the essence of the law in the summary of God’s requirements: love of God and love of neighbor (Mt 23:23-24; Lk 11:42-44). Jesus taught that the purpose of obedience is not primarily to receive a reward but to serve as salt (Mt 5:13) and light (Mt 5:14-16; cf. Eph 4:17–5:20), and to bear fruit (Jn 15:1-17). The purpose of the law of God is the gradual transformation of the children of God to reflect the image of the Son (Rom 8:29; 2 Cor 3:18; Col 3:10), to be an imitation of the Father (Eph 5:1-2), and to be filled with the Spirit of God (Gal 5:18, 22-24). For this purpose Jesus gave us the Beatitudes and the Sermon on the Mount, which summarize the intent of the teaching of Moses and the prophets (Mt 5–7).<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the law is to transform regenerated believers into maturity. Spiritual maturity is not a privilege that was reserved for believers after Christ; OT saints also walked with God (Enoch, Gn 5:22-24; Noah, 6:9; Abraham, 17:1). These were mature men who lived with integrity in the presence of God (cf. Gn 17:1; Dt 18:13; Pss 15:1-2; 18:26; 101:2, 6; 119:80; Prv 11:5).<\/p>\n<p>Maturity, or integrity, is that response to God whereby the believer no longer needs to live by individual stipulations or in fear of mistakes and sins of omission, but delights in doing the Lord’s will (Pss 1:2; 112:1). Since the coming of Christ and Pentecost, the Holy Spirit has been poured out on every believer. He has come not only to internalize the law of God (Jer 31:33) but also to help us develop Christian maturity by giving the fruits of godliness in greater fullness (Gal 5:22-24). Whereas maturity and freedom were experienced by some OT saints, it is God’s gift to all his children in Christ (Acts 2:39; 1 Cor 12:13). The purpose is still the same, “so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped [mature] for every good work” (2 Tm 3:17, <span>niv<\/span>), but the means to accomplish this and the status of the child of God is so much better since Pentecost.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Criminal Law and Punishment; Galatians, Letter to the; Hammurabi, Law Code of; Justification; Romans, Letter to the; Commandments, The Ten; Torah; Tradition.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LAW, Biblical Concept of God’s means of consecrating his people to himself. The nature and content of “law” may change, but the goal remains the same: maturity and conformity to the image of God. Preview • Historical Context • Law in the Old Testament • Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East • Old Testament Laws • Purposes of the Law Historical Context When man was created in God’s image, he received glory, rule, and provision for his daily sustenance from the Creator-King (Gn 1:27-30). Howe...","summary_en":"LAW, Biblical Concept of God’s means of consecrating his people to himself. The nature and content of “law” may change, but the goal remains the same: maturity and conformity to the image of God. Preview • Historical Context • Law in the Old Testament • Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East • Old Testament Laws • Purposes of the Law Historical Context When man was created in God’s image, he received glory, rule, and provision for his daily sustenance from the Creator-King (Gn 1:27-30). Howe...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":26403,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Moses","title_en":"Moses","content_ro":"<h3>MOSES<\/h3>\n<p>Great leader of the Hebrew people who brought them out of bondage in Egypt to the Promised Land in Canaan; also the one who gave them the law at Mt Sinai that became the basis for their religious faith through the centuries. Focused in this one person are the figures of prophet, priest, lawgiver, judge, intercessor, shepherd, miracle worker, and founder of a nation.<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of his name is uncertain. It has been explained as a Hebrew word meaning “to draw out” (Ex 2:10; cf. 2 Sm 22:17; Ps 18:16). If, however, it is an Egyptian name given him by the daughter of Pharaoh who found him, it is more likely from an Egyptian word for “son” (also found as part of many well-known Egyptian names such as Ahmose, Thutmose, and Ramses). No one else in the OT bears this name.<\/p>\n<p>Without question, the greatest figure in the OT (mentioned by name 767 times), his influence also extends to the pages of the NT (where he is mentioned 79 times). The first 40 years of his life were spent in the household of Pharaoh (Acts 7:23), where he was instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians. The next 40 years he spent in Midian as a fugitive from the wrath of Pharaoh, after killing an Egyptian who was mistreating a Hebrew. His last 40 years were devoted to leading the Israelites out of bondage in Egypt to the land God had promised to Abraham and his descendants (Gn 12:1-3). He died at the age of 120 after leading the Israelites successfully through 40 years of wandering in the wilderness to the very edge of the Promised Land on the east side of the Jordan River (Dt 34:7). He is one of the great figures in all of history, a man who took a group of slaves and, under inconceivably difficult circumstances, molded them into a nation that has influenced and altered the entire course of history.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• The First 40 Years—In Egypt<\/p>\n<p>• The Second 40 Years—In Midian<\/p>\n<p>• The Third 40 Years—From Egypt to Canaan<\/p>\n<p>• Moses in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>The only source of information for the life of Moses is the Bible. Archaeology confirms the credibility of the events associated with Moses, but it has never provided any specific confirmation of his existence or work. His story begins with the arrival in Egypt of Jacob, his sons, and their families during a time of famine in Canaan. Invited by Joseph and welcomed by Pharaoh, the family settled down in northeast Egypt in an area known as Goshen, where they remained for 430 years (Ex 12:40). With the passing of time, their numbers grew rapidly, so that the land was filled with them (1:7). A new king arose over Egypt who did not know Joseph. The biblical account does not give the name of this pharaoh, and there has never been agreement as to his identity. He has most frequently been identified as Thutmose III (1504–1451 <span>BC<\/span>), Seti I (1304–1290 <span>BC<\/span>), or Ramses II (1290–1224 <span>BC<\/span>). Out of fear that their growing numbers might become a threat to the security of his nation, Pharaoh determined to take measures to reduce their number. He put them to work building the store cities of Pithom and Rameses, but the severity of the work did not diminish them. He next tried to enlist the cooperation of the midwives to destroy the male babies, but they would not carry out his orders. He then ordered his own people to drown the male infants in the Nile River. Against the background of this first-known Jewish persecution, the baby Moses was born.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFirst40YearsInEgypt\">The First 40 Years—In Egypt<\/p>\n<h5>Birth and Early Life<\/h5>\n<p>A man of the family of Levi named Amram married his father’s sister Jochebed (Ex 6:20; cf. 2:1). Their first son, Aaron, three years older than Moses, was born before the command to drown the Hebrew babies was given, as there is no indication that his life was in danger. However, the cruel order was in force when Moses was born, and after three months, when his mother could no longer hide him, she took a basket made of bulrushes and daubed it with bitumen and pitch. She put the baby into the basket and placed it among the reeds along the banks of the river. An older sister, Miriam, stayed near the river to see what would happen. Soon the daughter of Pharaoh (identified by Josephus as Thermuthis and by others as Hatshepsut, but whose actual identity cannot be determined) came to the river to bathe, as was her custom. She discovered the baby, recognized it as one of the Hebrew children, and determined that she would raise the child as her own. Miriam emerged from her hiding place and offered to secure a Hebrew woman to nurse the child, an arrangement that was agreeable to the princess. Miriam took the baby to his own mother, who kept him for perhaps two or three years (cf. 1 Sm 1:19-24). Nothing is recorded of those formative years. Whether his mother continued seeing him during his later childhood and young manhood or revealed his true identity to him or taught him the Hebrew faith are matters of speculation. Moses was instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, as would befit a member of the royal household, and he became mighty in his words and deeds (Acts 7:22).<\/p>\n<h5>Identification with His Own People<\/h5>\n<p>Just when Moses became aware that he was a Hebrew rather than Egyptian cannot be known, but it is clear that he knew it by the time he was 40 years old. One day he went out to visit his people and to observe their treatment, for the cruel measures taken against them by Pharaoh at the time of Moses’ birth had not been lifted. Seeing an Egyptian beating a Hebrew, Moses in great anger killed the Egyptian and buried him. He thought the deed had gone unnoticed until the next day when he encountered two Hebrews fighting with each other. When he tried to act as peacemaker, they both turned on him and accused him of murder: “Who made you a prince and a judge over us? Do you mean to kill me, as you killed the Egyptian?” (Ex 2:14, <span>rsv<\/span>). Acts 7:25 adds: “He supposed that his brethren understood that God was giving them deliverance by his hand” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Aware that being a member of Pharaoh’s household would not exempt him from punishment now that the deed was known, Moses fled for his life to the land of Midian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheSecond40YearsInMidian\">The Second 40 Years—In Midian<\/p>\n<h5>Marriage into the Family of Jethro<\/h5>\n<p>Soon after arriving in Midian, Moses sat down by a well, where he observed the seven daughters of the priest of Midian who had come to the well to draw water for their father’s flock. Shepherds came and drove them away, but Moses intervened and helped them water their animals. When Jethro (Ex 3:1; also called Reuel, 2:18; Hobab, Nm 10:29) learned what had happened, he invited Moses to stay with his family and gave him Zipporah as his wife. (There is some disagreement among scholars regarding the identity of Hobab in Numbers 10:29; some think he was Moses’ father-in-law, while others maintain that Hobab was Moses’ brother-in-law. <em>See also<\/em> Hobab). Two children, Gershom (Ex 2:22) and Eliezer (18:4), were born to Moses and Zipporah during the years in Midian. Forty years passed, and Moses’ thoughts about his former life in Egypt must have faded into the past. He could not have foreseen that God would soon thrust him back into the midst of the court in Egypt, where he would confront the son of the now-dead pharaoh with the demand to release the Hebrew people from the bondage they had endured for so many years. God had not forgotten his people and was now ready to deliver them.<\/p>\n<h5>Encounter with God at the Burning Bush<\/h5>\n<p>One day, while Moses was taking care of the flocks of his father-in-law, he led them to Mt Horeb (known also as Sinai), where God appeared to him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush that burned but was not consumed. Moses approached to observe the strange sight more closely and heard God speak to him out of the bush, “Moses, Moses!” Moses replied, “Here am I.” Before he could come any nearer to the bush, God said, “Do not come near; put off your shoes from your feet, for the place on which you are standing is holy ground” (Ex 3:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). He further identified himself as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. He assured Moses that he was aware of the cruel afflictions of his people and had heard their cries. Then he told of his plan to send Moses to Egypt to deliver his people from their bondage.<\/p>\n<p>Faced with a challenge that seemed beyond his capabilities, the aged Moses began making excuses for not accepting the task. God assured Moses that he would be with him (Ex 3:11-12). To his excuse that he would not be able to give an answer if the people asked him the name of the God he represented, God revealed his name in the cryptic statement, “ ‘<span>I Am the One Who Always Is<\/span>’ . . . Just tell them, ‘I <span>Am<\/span> has sent me to you’ ” (vv 13-14, <span>nlt<\/span>). Many interpretations have been proposed for the name. Whatever else it means, it undoubtedly suggests the self-existence and all-sufficiency of God. Moses then argued that the people would not believe him when he told them that God had sent him to deliver them from Egypt. In response God gave him three signs: When he cast his shepherd’s rod to the ground, it became a serpent. When he put his hand to his bosom, it became leprous. He was also told that when he would pour water from the Nile on the ground, it would become blood (Ex 4:1-9). Even armed with these powerful evidences of the presence of God with him, Moses raised still another objection, “O Lord, I’m just not a good speaker. I never have been, and I’m not now, even after you have spoken to me. I’m clumsy with words” (v 10, <span>nlt<\/span>). God told him that he would teach him what to say, but despite such assurance, Moses asked God to send someone else. In anger mingled with compassion, God made Moses’ brother, Aaron, the spokesman, but said his instructions would still be given directly to Moses.<\/p>\n<h5>Return to Egypt<\/h5>\n<p>Moses took his wife and sons and set out for Egypt, telling his father-in-law only that he wanted to go back to Egypt to visit his kinsmen there (Ex 4:18). The biblical account says he put his wife and sons on the same donkey to journey back to Egypt (v 20). The fact that all three rode the same animal indicates that both children were quite young and had not been born in the early years of Moses’ marriage. At a lodging place along the way a strange thing happened. The Lord met him and sought to kill him (v 24), apparently because Moses had failed to circumcise the baby before leaving Midian. When Zipporah realized that Moses’ life was in danger, she performed the rite herself and said to her husband, “What a blood-smeared bridegroom you are to me!” (v 25, <span>nlt<\/span>). Whatever else may have been involved in this unusual encounter with God, it was a solemn reminder that the one who was to be the leader of the covenant people must not himself neglect any part of the covenant (Gn 17:10-14).<\/p>\n<p>God told Aaron (who was still in Egypt) to go to the mountain where Moses had encountered God at the burning bush and meet his brother there. Moses told Aaron everything that had happened, and together they went to Egypt, gathered the elders together, and informed them of these matters. When Moses and Aaron performed the signs in the presence of the people, they believed these leaders had been sent by God to deliver them from their affliction (Ex 4:30-31).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheThird40YearsFromEgypttoCanaan\">The Third 40 Years—From Egypt to Canaan<\/p>\n<h5>The Encounter with Pharaoh<\/h5>\n<p>Soon after his return to Egypt, Moses, accompanied by Aaron, went to Pharaoh and repeated the demands of the Lord, “Let my people go, for they must go out into the wilderness to hold a religious festival in my honor” (Ex 5:1, <span>nlt<\/span>). Pharaoh rejected the demand with the observation that he had never heard of this God of Moses. When one realizes that Egyptian kings considered themselves to be gods, the affront to Pharaoh becomes even more acute. Not only did he reject Moses’ demands, but he intensified the burdens of the Hebrews. Their work had up until then required them to make brick using straw provided for them, but now Pharaoh said they would have to gather their own straw and still produce the same number of bricks. The Hebrews turned in anguish and anger to Moses and blamed him for making them offensive in the sight of Pharaoh. Even Moses could not understand the turn of events and complained bitterly to God. God reassured Moses that he would deliver the Hebrews from their bondage, and moreover, he would bring them into the land he had promised Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. He then instructed Moses to return to Pharaoh and repeat the demand to release the Hebrews upon threat of severe reprisal if the demand were ignored.<\/p>\n<p>Ushered again into Pharaoh’s presence, Moses repeated his request for release of the Israelites. He attempted to impress Pharaoh by turning his rod into a serpent, but the Egyptian wise men, through their secret arts, were able to duplicate the miracle, so Pharaoh’s heart remained hardened and he would not listen to Moses. In rapid succession Moses brought nine plagues upon the land of Egypt to show the omnipotence of God to force the compliance of Pharaoh. These included a plague in which the water of the Nile turned to blood, a plague of frogs, one of gnats, then of flies, a plague on the livestock, boils on the people, plagues of hail, locusts, and complete darkness. During the plagues of the frogs, flies, hail, locusts, and darkness, Pharaoh was distraught and would temporarily relent and agree to Moses’ demands, but as soon as the plague was lifted, his heart hardened and he would retract his promise. The outcome of the first nine plagues was terrible devastation of the land of Egypt, but the Israelites were not released. There was yet one more plague in store, the most terrible of all.<\/p>\n<h5>The First Passover<\/h5>\n<p>God told Moses that there remained one more plague in store for the Egyptians: “All the firstborn sons will die in every family in Egypt, from the oldest son of Pharaoh, who sits on the throne, to the oldest son of his lowliest slave. Even the firstborn of the animals will die” (Ex 11:5, <span>nlt<\/span>). Furthermore, he assured Moses that the plague would not touch a single household of the Hebrews, “Then you will know that the <span>Lord<\/span> makes a distinction between the Egyptians and the Israelites” (v 7, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>God instructed the people through Moses and Aaron to make their preparations for leaving the land in haste. They were to go to the Egyptians and ask them for their jewels of silver and gold (Ex 11:2-3), a request to which the Egyptians agreed, perhaps out of fear of the Hebrews and in the belief that the gifts would bring about an end of the terrors that had struck the land. The Hebrews were also instructed to prepare a lamb for each family—small families could share—for the last meal to be eaten in the land of Egypt (a rite that became the pattern for the Jewish observance of the Passover for many centuries). Blood of the lamb was to be put on the doorposts and lintels of the houses in which the Passover meal was being eaten that night. The Hebrews were promised that wherever the blood was on the door, no harm would come to that household. They were also instructed to prepare unleavened bread. At midnight the death angel of the Lord killed all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh himself to the lowest captive in a dungeon; not a single house of the Egyptians escaped tragedy. When Pharaoh saw what had happened, he ordered Moses and the people to leave the land at once (12:31-32). The biblical record says that about 600,000 Hebrew men left Egypt. Together with women and children, the total would have been in excess of 2 million people.<\/p>\n<h5>The Exodus from Egypt<\/h5>\n<p>The exodus is the central event of the OT and marks the birth of Israel as a nation. The Jewish people still look back to that event as the great redemptive act of God in history on behalf of his people, much as Christians look upon the cross as the great redemptive act of their faith.<\/p>\n\n<p>The exact route taken by the Hebrews out of Egypt cannot be determined today, though many possibilities have been proposed. They did not take the shortest, most direct route to Canaan (which would have been about a 10 days’ journey along the Mediterranean coastline), but set out in the direction of Mt Sinai, where Moses had earlier met God at the burning bush. As a sign that Moses had been sent to deliver the people, God told Moses he would bring them to that same spot, where they would worship God (Ex 3:12). The Hebrews did not forget the request of Joseph to carry his bones with them when they returned to their own land (Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19).<\/p>\n<p>As the people journeyed, they were preceded by a pillar of cloud during the day and a pillar of fire at night. The cloud represented the presence of God with his people and guided them along the route they should travel.<\/p>\n<p>Back in Egypt, Pharaoh was having second thoughts about letting the Hebrews leave the land and decided to pursue them with his army and bring them back. When the Hebrews saw the approaching cloud of dust and realized that the Egyptian army was pursuing them, they were terrified. The sea lay ahead of them and the Egyptians were behind; there seemed to be no way of escape. The people turned on Moses, blaming him for bringing them out of Egypt. God again assured them that they did not need to be afraid or do anything to defend themselves. He promised to fight the battle for them and give them victory (Ex 14:14).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord parted the water of the Sea of Reeds (traditionally but erroneously referred to as the Red Sea) by a strong east wind and allowed the Israelites to pass through the sea on dry ground to the other side. The Egyptians rushed after the Israelites, following them into the dry bed of the sea. But before they reached the other side, the waters rushed back together, destroying the Egyptian army in the midst of the sea and leaving the Israelites safe on the other side. The people celebrated their great deliverance in song (Ex 15) and then continued their journey. The narrative that follows describes the struggle of the Israelites to survive in the desert—problems of food and water, internal dissension, murmurings against Moses, and battles with enemies. Through all their experiences, Moses towers as the unifying force and great spiritual leader.<\/p>\n<p>In spite of having seen God’s great act of deliverance so recently, the faith of the Israelites was not strong. Three days later they came to a place where the water was not fit to drink, and they began complaining against Moses. The Lord showed Moses how to purify the water, and the people’s needs were satisfied (Ex 15:22-25). When they reached the wilderness of Sin, they complained again, this time because of lack of food. God met their need by supplying manna, a breadlike substance that would serve as their food until they came to Canaan (16:1-21). Later, camped at Rephidim, the people complained again, this time for lack of water. Once again God met their needs by supplying water from the rock at Horeb (17:1-7). The Amalekites attacked them while they were still camped at Rephidim, but God gave a great victory to the Israelites (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>Moses and the people reached Sinai and camped there. Jethro came to visit, bringing Moses’ wife and sons. Zipporah had apparently decided to return with her children to stay with her father rather than to go on to Egypt with Moses. It was a joyful reunion, and Jethro made a burnt offering and sacrifices to God (an act that has evoked the suggestion that Jethro was a true worshiper of God, though nothing is known of his links to the Hebrew faith). When Jethro observed Moses trying to settle all the disputes and problems of the Hebrews unaided, he proposed that Moses delegate responsibility for some of the lesser matters to able men chosen from among the people. Moses accepted the suggestion, and shortly afterward Jethro returned to his own land. He did not remain at Sinai to participate in the ratification of the covenant (Ex 18:13-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Giving of the Law at Sinai<\/h5>\n<p>God had kept his promises to Moses. He had delivered the Hebrews from their Egyptian bondage and brought them to the very place where he had commissioned Moses to be their leader. He was now ready to enter into a covenant relationship with Israel. Amid a spectacular and terrifying scene of lightning, thunder, thick clouds, fire, smoke, and earthquake, God descended to the top of Sinai and called Moses to come up the mountain, where he remained 40 days to receive the law that would become the basis of the covenant.<\/p>\n<p>At Sinai, God was revealed as the God who demands exclusive allegiance in all areas of life and, at the same time, as the God who desires personal fellowship with his people.<\/p>\n<h5>Apostasy of the People<\/h5>\n<p>While Moses tarried on Mt Sinai, the people below became impatient and skeptical about his return, so they went to Aaron and asked him to make idols for them to worship. They contributed the gold earrings they were wearing. “Then Aaron took the gold, melted it down, and molded and tooled it into the shape of a calf. The people exclaimed, ‘O Israel, these are the gods who brought you out of Egypt!’ ” (Ex 32:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). The next day they joined in the worship of the idol with sacrifices and revelry. God told Moses what was taking place below and angrily declared that he was going to destroy the people but would make a great nation of Moses and his descendants. Moses immediately interceded on behalf of the people, and God’s wrath abated. Moses descended the mountain, carrying the two tablets of stone on which the law had been written, but when he entered the camp and saw what was taking place, he could not restrain his anger. He threw the stone tablets to the ground, ground the golden calf to powder, mixed it with water, and forced the people to drink it. He turned angrily to Aaron and demanded an explanation for the great sin that had been committed. Aaron lamely tried to shift the blame by minimizing his own role: “I threw them [the gold] into the fire—and out came this calf!” (v 24, <span>nlt<\/span>). Moses called for volunteers to carry out God’s judgment on the people for the great sin they had committed. Men of the tribe of Levi responded and executed about 3,000 men. Later they were commended and rewarded (Dt 33:9-10). Moses again interceded for the people, requesting that he be destroyed with the rest if God could not forgive them. God relented and promised Moses that the angel of the Lord would go with them still (Ex 32:34).<\/p>\n<p>Then Moses made a special request that he might be allowed to see the glory of the Lord. God instructed Moses to hew out two more tablets of stone like the ones he had destroyed and to return to the top of the mountain the next day. There the Lord passed before him and proclaimed his name: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span>, I am the <span>Lord<\/span>, the merciful and gracious God. I am slow to anger and rich in unfailing love and faithfulness” (Ex 34:6, <span>nlt<\/span>). Moses remained on the mountain another 40 days, where he received renewed warnings against idolatry and further instructions from the Lord, together with another copy of the Ten Commandments on tablets of stone. When Moses came down from the mountain, he was not aware that the skin of his face shone as a result of talking with God. At first the people were afraid to come near him, but he called them together and repeated all the Lord had said to him on the mountain. Afterward, he covered his face with a veil, which he removed only when he went into the presence of the Lord. Paul said the purpose of the veil was to prevent the people from seeing the heavenly light gradually fade from Moses’ face (2 Cor 3:13).<\/p>\n<h5>The Tabernacle and Establishment of the Priesthood<\/h5>\n<p>When Moses went up to the mountain the first time to receive the law from God, he was instructed to collect materials to be used in the construction of the tabernacle or tent. Gold, silver, bronze, blue and purple and scarlet yarn, fine twined linen, goats’ hair, tanned rams’ skins, goatskins, and acacia wood would be needed, along with oil for the lamps, spices for the anointing oil and for the fragrant incense, onyx stones, and stones for setting (Ex 25:3-7). The pattern for construction was also given to him, together with the ritual to be used for the consecration of the priests. A man named Bezalel was put in charge of the construction of the tabernacle, assisted by Oholiab (31:1-6). The tabernacle was portable like a tent so that it could be taken down and moved from place to place as the Hebrews continued their journey toward Canaan.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to giving Moses directions for the tabernacle, God also instructed him concerning the sacrifices that were to be brought: the burnt offering, grain offering, peace offering, sin offering, and guilt offering (Lv 1–7). The solemn ceremony for ordaining Aaron and his sons as priests and for inaugurating the worship practices were to be performed by Moses (chs 8–9).<\/p>\n<p>Sometime after this solemn inauguration of the religious ritual actually took place, Nadab and Abihu, two of Aaron’s four sons, offered unauthorized fire before the Lord. A fire came out from the Lord and destroyed them. Moses forbade Aaron and his sons Eleazar and Ithamar to express grief because of the sinfulness of the act (Lv 10:1-7). The nature of their sin is difficult to determine, but it surely involved a violation of God’s holiness. Therefore, it is appropriate that a large part of the remainder of the book of Leviticus gives regulations that stress the holy living that God expected from his people.<\/p>\n<h5>From Sinai to Kadesh<\/h5>\n<p>A year had elapsed from the time the Israelites left Egypt until the census was taken (Nm 9:1). God reminded the people that it was time to observe the Passover, which they did, and a month later they set out from Sinai and came to the wilderness of Paran. Along the way they complained about the unvarying diet of manna and they longed for the fish, cucumbers, melons, leeks, onions, and garlic they had eaten in Egypt (11:4-6). In anger God sent quail in abundance, but even while the people were devouring the meat, God sent a great plague that killed many Israelites. The complaining attitude of the people was shared even by Miriam and Aaron. They began to speak against the Cushite woman Moses had married (12:1-2). It is not certain whether the Cushite was an Ethiopian or whether this was another way of referring to Zipporah. If Moses did marry a second time, no mention is made of it elsewhere in the OT. Moses made no reply to the accusations of his brother and sister. It was not necessary, for God intervened in defense of his servant. He smote Miriam with leprosy for her part in speaking against Moses, and when Aaron saw what had happened to Miriam, he acknowledged that they both had sinned. Miriam’s leprosy was removed in response to Moses’ fervent intercession.<\/p>\n\n<p>While the people were encamped at Kadesh (also called Kadesh-barnea—Nm 32:8) in the wilderness of Paran, Moses sent 12 men into Canaan, one from each tribe, to spy out the land in preparation for the Israelite entry. After 40 days the spies returned and, though they acknowledged that the land was fertile and inviting, 10 of them were afraid of the Canaanite inhabitants and advised against going into the land. Only Joshua and Caleb were willing to go ahead and occupy the territory. The entire congregation joined the protest against going in and determined to choose a new leader and return to Egypt rather than risk death by the sword in Canaan. They threatened to stone Moses and Aaron. At that moment God intervened and would have destroyed all the people on the spot except for the intervention of Moses (13:1–14:19). He declared that, if God did not bring the people into Canaan, the nations round about would conclude that the God of the Israelites was unable to bring them into the land. Once again God acquiesced to Moses’ request to pardon the people but said that none of them 20 years and older who had complained against him would be allowed to enter the land. All the people would wander in the wilderness for 40 years until that generation died, and then their children would be allowed to enter Canaan (14:29-33). When they heard the Lord’s sentence upon them, the people quickly decided to lift the sentence of judgment by entering the land at once, but God was not with them, and they suffered a disastrous defeat at the hands of the Amalekites and Canaanites.<\/p>\n<h5>Forty Years in the Wilderness<\/h5>\n<p>Very little is known about events during the 40 years of wilderness wanderings. In spite of the judgment that had already come upon them, the people did not seem to change their ways. A man named Korah led another rebellion against the authority of Moses and Aaron. God would not listen to the pleas of Moses and Aaron on behalf of these dissidents (Nm 16:22-24), but told the congregation to separate itself from the tents of Korah and his conspirators. While the people watched, the ground split open and swallowed up the rebellious factions together with their households and all their possessions. Though the rest of the Israelites witnessed the fate of the rebels, it did not deter them from again turning on Moses and Aaron. At this, God told Moses to remove himself from the murmuring congregation in order that he could take vengeance. Though Moses offered atonement for the people’s sins, 14,700 died by plague before the punishment was ended. To demonstrate further to the people that Moses was his chosen leader, the Lord instructed Moses to take rods, one for each tribe, and to deposit them in the tent of meeting. God would cause the rod of the man chosen by him to sprout, and so silence the murmurings of the people. The rod belonging to Aaron sprouted and budded and bloomed, but the people only complained more.<\/p>\n<p>As the people neared the end of their years of wilderness wanderings, Miriam died in Kadesh and was buried there (Nm 20:1). Soon after, the people began to complain once more for lack of water. God instructed Moses to speak to a rock that would bring forth water to satisfy the needs of the people. Instead of speaking to the rock, Moses struck it twice with his rod. The water came forth, but God rebuked Moses and Aaron: “Because you did not trust me enough to demonstrate my holiness to the people of Israel, you will not lead them into the land I am giving them!” (v 12, <span>nlt<\/span>). The nature of the sin is not clear, but Moses and Aaron were apparently taking to themselves honor that belonged to God alone. Because of the sin, they were denied the privilege of leading the Israelites into the Promised Land. The punishment may seem too severe for the sin, but it shows that the privileged role of leadership given to Moses and Aaron carried with it an unusual measure of responsibility.<\/p>\n<p>The people then journeyed from Kadesh to Mt Hor on the border of the land of Edom, where Aaron died. Moses took his priestly garments from him and gave them to Eleazar, his son, thereby transferring the priestly office (Nm 20:28).<\/p>\n<p>As the people came closer to their destination, resistance on the part of the native population increased. There was a skirmish with the king of Arad and his forces at Hormah, resulting in a victory for Israel (Nm 21:1-3). As they journeyed around Edom, some of the Israelites began speaking against God and Moses because there was no food or water and they were tired of eating manna. This time the Lord sent poisonous snakes among the people, and many of them died of the venomous bites. Those who had not yet been bitten came to Moses, acknowledged their sin, and asked that the serpents be removed from their midst. God instructed Moses to make a serpent of bronze and set it on a pole. If a person bitten by a serpent looked up at the bronze serpent, he or she would live.<\/p>\n<p>As the Israelites approached the territory of Sihon, king of the Amorites, they sent messengers asking permission to pass peaceably through his land. Instead of granting the request, Sihon gathered his army together and fought against Israel. He was killed in the battle, and his land and cities were taken and occupied by the Hebrews (Nm 21:21-25).<\/p>\n<h5>Arrival at the Jordan River<\/h5>\n<p>After their victory over Sihon, the Israelites set out again and encamped in the plains of Moab on the east side of the Jordan River facing Jericho, in full view of the Promised Land. The Moabites were terrified by the presence of these people because they had heard what happened to the Amorites. Their king, Balak, hired a magician named Balaam to curse the Israelites. Three times Balaam attempted to curse them, but each time God turned his words into a blessing (Nm 22–24). Though unable to curse the Israelites, Balaam was responsible for an even greater calamity. He advised the Moabites to entice the Israelites to sacrifice to their gods and bow down to them (Nm 25:1-3; 31:16; 2 Pt 2:15; Rv 2:14). While the people were worshiping the Moabite deity, Baal of Peor, God’s anger was kindled against them, and he sent a plague that killed 24,000 of them (Nm 25:9). It was Israel’s first encounter with the seductive allurement of licentious idolatry and an ominous foreview of what would happen after they settled down in Canaan. Their continued attraction to idolatry would be their final undoing.<\/p>\n<p>After the plague, God instructed Moses and Eleazar to take another census of the people like the one almost 40 years earlier. A whole generation of Israelites had died in the wilderness, but they had been replaced by an almost equal number, so that now there were 601,730 men 20 years and older who were able to go to war (Nm 26:51). Not a man remained of those who had been counted in the first census, except Caleb and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p>The Lord instructed Moses to lay hands on Joshua and commission him as the new leader in the sight of Eleazar the priest and all the congregation (Nm 27:12-23). In addition, the Lord gave Moses instructions concerning feasts and offerings and vows (chs 28–30). God ordered Moses, as his last act as leader, to avenge the Israelites on the Midianites. In that battle the armies of Israel gained a great victory over the Midianites, killing their kings, their men, and also Balaam.<\/p>\n<p>The Lord gave instructions to Moses concerning the boundaries that would mark the Promised Land and named the men who would divide the land among the tribes (Nm 34). He also ordered that 48 cities be given to the Levites, the priestly tribe, as their portion. Six of these were designated as cities of refuge where murderers could flee so that they would not be killed by those seeking vengeance without having an opportunity to stand before the congregation for judgment (ch 35).<\/p>\n<h5>Moses’ Death<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Deuteronomy has often been called Moses’ valedictory speech to the people, for in it Moses is not merely the chief speaker but the only speaker. With the congregation of his people gathered before him, he rehearsed all that God had done for them since leaving Sinai, and he reminded them of their failure to enter the Promised Land 38 years earlier (Dt 2:14). He recalled his plea that God would let him cross the Jordan and see the land that was to be the home of the people, but God responded that Moses would only be allowed to view the land from the top of Pisgah. Moses then exhorted the people to obey the statutes and ordinances that had been given to them in order to experience God’s blessings in the land.<\/p>\n\n<p>As the day of Moses’ death approached, the Lord ordered Moses and Joshua to present themselves at the tent of meeting in order for Joshua to be commissioned as the new leader (Dt 31:14-23). Before his death, Moses pronounced a blessing upon all the Israelites (ch 33). Having completed these tasks, Moses went up from the plains of Moab to Mt Nebo, and to the top of Pisgah. From there God showed him the land promised long ago to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob—the land that was soon to be the home of the wandering Israelite tribes. Again God told him that he would not be allowed to cross over the Jordan. Moses died there and God buried him somewhere in the valley in the land of Moab opposite Beth-peor (34:6). Moses was 120 years old when he died, and the Israelites mourned his death for 30 days. The finest tribute to Moses is found in the closing words of the book of Deuteronomy, “There has never been another prophet like Moses, whom the <span>Lord<\/span> knew face to face” (v 10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MosesintheNewTestament\">Moses in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>All Jews and Christians in apostolic times considered Moses the author of the Pentateuch. Such expressions as “the law of Moses” (Lk 2:22), “Moses commanded” (Mt 19:7), “Moses said” (Mk 7:10) “and Moses wrote” (12:19) shows that his name was synonymous with the OT books attributed to him. He is mentioned in the NT more than any other OT figure, a total of 79 times. His role as lawgiver is emphasized more than any other aspect of his life (Mt 8:4; Mk 7:10; Jn 1:17; Acts 15:1). He appears at the transfiguration of Jesus as the representative of OT law, along with Elijah as the representative of OT prophets (Mt 17:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>Moses’ role as prophet is also mentioned in the NT. As a prophet, he spoke of the coming Messiah and his sufferings (Lk 24:25-27; Acts 3:22). The NT also draws from the life and experiences of Moses to show patterns of life under the new covenant. The nativity story of Jesus parallels the Mosaic story of the infant deliverer being rescued from the evil designs of an earthly despot (Mt 2:13-18). Jesus’ proclamation of a new law in his Sermon on the Mount parallels the giving of the law at Sinai (Mt 5–7) and presents Jesus as the authoritative interpreter of the will of God. Contrast between the old law and the new relationship with God is especially marked in the book of Galatians. The comparison of Moses with Christ is an important emphasis of the book of Hebrews (Heb 3:5-6; 9:11-22). John contrasted the law that was given through Moses with the grace and truth that came through Jesus Christ (Jn 1:17). He also contrasted the manna in the wilderness to Jesus as “the bread of life” (6:30-35).<\/p>\n<p>Other references to Moses or to events associated with him include his birth (Acts 7:20; Heb 11:23), the burning bush (Lk 20:37), the magicians of Egypt (2 Tm 3:8), the Passover (Heb 11:28), the exodus (3:16), crossing of the sea (1 Cor 10:2), the covenant sacrifice at Sinai (Mt 26:28), the manna (1 Cor 10:3), the glory on Moses’ face (2 Cor 3:7-18), water from the rock (1 Cor 10:4), the bronze serpent (Jn 3:14), and the song of Moses (Rv 15:3).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Egypt, Egyptian; Exodus, The; Israel, History of; Plagues upon Egypt; Priests and Levites; Tabernacle; Temple; Commandments, The Ten; Wilderness Wanderings.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MOSES<\/h3>\n<p>Great leader of the Hebrew people who brought them out of bondage in Egypt to the Promised Land in Canaan; also the one who gave them the law at Mt Sinai that became the basis for their religious faith through the centuries. Focused in this one person are the figures of prophet, priest, lawgiver, judge, intercessor, shepherd, miracle worker, and founder of a nation.<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of his name is uncertain. It has been explained as a Hebrew word meaning “to draw out” (Ex 2:10; cf. 2 Sm 22:17; Ps 18:16). If, however, it is an Egyptian name given him by the daughter of Pharaoh who found him, it is more likely from an Egyptian word for “son” (also found as part of many well-known Egyptian names such as Ahmose, Thutmose, and Ramses). No one else in the OT bears this name.<\/p>\n<p>Without question, the greatest figure in the OT (mentioned by name 767 times), his influence also extends to the pages of the NT (where he is mentioned 79 times). The first 40 years of his life were spent in the household of Pharaoh (Acts 7:23), where he was instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians. The next 40 years he spent in Midian as a fugitive from the wrath of Pharaoh, after killing an Egyptian who was mistreating a Hebrew. His last 40 years were devoted to leading the Israelites out of bondage in Egypt to the land God had promised to Abraham and his descendants (Gn 12:1-3). He died at the age of 120 after leading the Israelites successfully through 40 years of wandering in the wilderness to the very edge of the Promised Land on the east side of the Jordan River (Dt 34:7). He is one of the great figures in all of history, a man who took a group of slaves and, under inconceivably difficult circumstances, molded them into a nation that has influenced and altered the entire course of history.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• The First 40 Years—In Egypt<\/p>\n<p>• The Second 40 Years—In Midian<\/p>\n<p>• The Third 40 Years—From Egypt to Canaan<\/p>\n<p>• Moses in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>The only source of information for the life of Moses is the Bible. Archaeology confirms the credibility of the events associated with Moses, but it has never provided any specific confirmation of his existence or work. His story begins with the arrival in Egypt of Jacob, his sons, and their families during a time of famine in Canaan. Invited by Joseph and welcomed by Pharaoh, the family settled down in northeast Egypt in an area known as Goshen, where they remained for 430 years (Ex 12:40). With the passing of time, their numbers grew rapidly, so that the land was filled with them (1:7). A new king arose over Egypt who did not know Joseph. The biblical account does not give the name of this pharaoh, and there has never been agreement as to his identity. He has most frequently been identified as Thutmose III (1504–1451 <span>BC<\/span>), Seti I (1304–1290 <span>BC<\/span>), or Ramses II (1290–1224 <span>BC<\/span>). Out of fear that their growing numbers might become a threat to the security of his nation, Pharaoh determined to take measures to reduce their number. He put them to work building the store cities of Pithom and Rameses, but the severity of the work did not diminish them. He next tried to enlist the cooperation of the midwives to destroy the male babies, but they would not carry out his orders. He then ordered his own people to drown the male infants in the Nile River. Against the background of this first-known Jewish persecution, the baby Moses was born.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFirst40YearsInEgypt\">The First 40 Years—In Egypt<\/p>\n<h5>Birth and Early Life<\/h5>\n<p>A man of the family of Levi named Amram married his father’s sister Jochebed (Ex 6:20; cf. 2:1). Their first son, Aaron, three years older than Moses, was born before the command to drown the Hebrew babies was given, as there is no indication that his life was in danger. However, the cruel order was in force when Moses was born, and after three months, when his mother could no longer hide him, she took a basket made of bulrushes and daubed it with bitumen and pitch. She put the baby into the basket and placed it among the reeds along the banks of the river. An older sister, Miriam, stayed near the river to see what would happen. Soon the daughter of Pharaoh (identified by Josephus as Thermuthis and by others as Hatshepsut, but whose actual identity cannot be determined) came to the river to bathe, as was her custom. She discovered the baby, recognized it as one of the Hebrew children, and determined that she would raise the child as her own. Miriam emerged from her hiding place and offered to secure a Hebrew woman to nurse the child, an arrangement that was agreeable to the princess. Miriam took the baby to his own mother, who kept him for perhaps two or three years (cf. 1 Sm 1:19-24). Nothing is recorded of those formative years. Whether his mother continued seeing him during his later childhood and young manhood or revealed his true identity to him or taught him the Hebrew faith are matters of speculation. Moses was instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, as would befit a member of the royal household, and he became mighty in his words and deeds (Acts 7:22).<\/p>\n<h5>Identification with His Own People<\/h5>\n<p>Just when Moses became aware that he was a Hebrew rather than Egyptian cannot be known, but it is clear that he knew it by the time he was 40 years old. One day he went out to visit his people and to observe their treatment, for the cruel measures taken against them by Pharaoh at the time of Moses’ birth had not been lifted. Seeing an Egyptian beating a Hebrew, Moses in great anger killed the Egyptian and buried him. He thought the deed had gone unnoticed until the next day when he encountered two Hebrews fighting with each other. When he tried to act as peacemaker, they both turned on him and accused him of murder: “Who made you a prince and a judge over us? Do you mean to kill me, as you killed the Egyptian?” (Ex 2:14, <span>rsv<\/span>). Acts 7:25 adds: “He supposed that his brethren understood that God was giving them deliverance by his hand” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Aware that being a member of Pharaoh’s household would not exempt him from punishment now that the deed was known, Moses fled for his life to the land of Midian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheSecond40YearsInMidian\">The Second 40 Years—In Midian<\/p>\n<h5>Marriage into the Family of Jethro<\/h5>\n<p>Soon after arriving in Midian, Moses sat down by a well, where he observed the seven daughters of the priest of Midian who had come to the well to draw water for their father’s flock. Shepherds came and drove them away, but Moses intervened and helped them water their animals. When Jethro (Ex 3:1; also called Reuel, 2:18; Hobab, Nm 10:29) learned what had happened, he invited Moses to stay with his family and gave him Zipporah as his wife. (There is some disagreement among scholars regarding the identity of Hobab in Numbers 10:29; some think he was Moses’ father-in-law, while others maintain that Hobab was Moses’ brother-in-law. <em>See also<\/em> Hobab). Two children, Gershom (Ex 2:22) and Eliezer (18:4), were born to Moses and Zipporah during the years in Midian. Forty years passed, and Moses’ thoughts about his former life in Egypt must have faded into the past. He could not have foreseen that God would soon thrust him back into the midst of the court in Egypt, where he would confront the son of the now-dead pharaoh with the demand to release the Hebrew people from the bondage they had endured for so many years. God had not forgotten his people and was now ready to deliver them.<\/p>\n<h5>Encounter with God at the Burning Bush<\/h5>\n<p>One day, while Moses was taking care of the flocks of his father-in-law, he led them to Mt Horeb (known also as Sinai), where God appeared to him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush that burned but was not consumed. Moses approached to observe the strange sight more closely and heard God speak to him out of the bush, “Moses, Moses!” Moses replied, “Here am I.” Before he could come any nearer to the bush, God said, “Do not come near; put off your shoes from your feet, for the place on which you are standing is holy ground” (Ex 3:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). He further identified himself as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. He assured Moses that he was aware of the cruel afflictions of his people and had heard their cries. Then he told of his plan to send Moses to Egypt to deliver his people from their bondage.<\/p>\n<p>Faced with a challenge that seemed beyond his capabilities, the aged Moses began making excuses for not accepting the task. God assured Moses that he would be with him (Ex 3:11-12). To his excuse that he would not be able to give an answer if the people asked him the name of the God he represented, God revealed his name in the cryptic statement, “ ‘<span>I Am the One Who Always Is<\/span>’ . . . Just tell them, ‘I <span>Am<\/span> has sent me to you’ ” (vv 13-14, <span>nlt<\/span>). Many interpretations have been proposed for the name. Whatever else it means, it undoubtedly suggests the self-existence and all-sufficiency of God. Moses then argued that the people would not believe him when he told them that God had sent him to deliver them from Egypt. In response God gave him three signs: When he cast his shepherd’s rod to the ground, it became a serpent. When he put his hand to his bosom, it became leprous. He was also told that when he would pour water from the Nile on the ground, it would become blood (Ex 4:1-9). Even armed with these powerful evidences of the presence of God with him, Moses raised still another objection, “O Lord, I’m just not a good speaker. I never have been, and I’m not now, even after you have spoken to me. I’m clumsy with words” (v 10, <span>nlt<\/span>). God told him that he would teach him what to say, but despite such assurance, Moses asked God to send someone else. In anger mingled with compassion, God made Moses’ brother, Aaron, the spokesman, but said his instructions would still be given directly to Moses.<\/p>\n<h5>Return to Egypt<\/h5>\n<p>Moses took his wife and sons and set out for Egypt, telling his father-in-law only that he wanted to go back to Egypt to visit his kinsmen there (Ex 4:18). The biblical account says he put his wife and sons on the same donkey to journey back to Egypt (v 20). The fact that all three rode the same animal indicates that both children were quite young and had not been born in the early years of Moses’ marriage. At a lodging place along the way a strange thing happened. The Lord met him and sought to kill him (v 24), apparently because Moses had failed to circumcise the baby before leaving Midian. When Zipporah realized that Moses’ life was in danger, she performed the rite herself and said to her husband, “What a blood-smeared bridegroom you are to me!” (v 25, <span>nlt<\/span>). Whatever else may have been involved in this unusual encounter with God, it was a solemn reminder that the one who was to be the leader of the covenant people must not himself neglect any part of the covenant (Gn 17:10-14).<\/p>\n<p>God told Aaron (who was still in Egypt) to go to the mountain where Moses had encountered God at the burning bush and meet his brother there. Moses told Aaron everything that had happened, and together they went to Egypt, gathered the elders together, and informed them of these matters. When Moses and Aaron performed the signs in the presence of the people, they believed these leaders had been sent by God to deliver them from their affliction (Ex 4:30-31).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheThird40YearsFromEgypttoCanaan\">The Third 40 Years—From Egypt to Canaan<\/p>\n<h5>The Encounter with Pharaoh<\/h5>\n<p>Soon after his return to Egypt, Moses, accompanied by Aaron, went to Pharaoh and repeated the demands of the Lord, “Let my people go, for they must go out into the wilderness to hold a religious festival in my honor” (Ex 5:1, <span>nlt<\/span>). Pharaoh rejected the demand with the observation that he had never heard of this God of Moses. When one realizes that Egyptian kings considered themselves to be gods, the affront to Pharaoh becomes even more acute. Not only did he reject Moses’ demands, but he intensified the burdens of the Hebrews. Their work had up until then required them to make brick using straw provided for them, but now Pharaoh said they would have to gather their own straw and still produce the same number of bricks. The Hebrews turned in anguish and anger to Moses and blamed him for making them offensive in the sight of Pharaoh. Even Moses could not understand the turn of events and complained bitterly to God. God reassured Moses that he would deliver the Hebrews from their bondage, and moreover, he would bring them into the land he had promised Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. He then instructed Moses to return to Pharaoh and repeat the demand to release the Hebrews upon threat of severe reprisal if the demand were ignored.<\/p>\n<p>Ushered again into Pharaoh’s presence, Moses repeated his request for release of the Israelites. He attempted to impress Pharaoh by turning his rod into a serpent, but the Egyptian wise men, through their secret arts, were able to duplicate the miracle, so Pharaoh’s heart remained hardened and he would not listen to Moses. In rapid succession Moses brought nine plagues upon the land of Egypt to show the omnipotence of God to force the compliance of Pharaoh. These included a plague in which the water of the Nile turned to blood, a plague of frogs, one of gnats, then of flies, a plague on the livestock, boils on the people, plagues of hail, locusts, and complete darkness. During the plagues of the frogs, flies, hail, locusts, and darkness, Pharaoh was distraught and would temporarily relent and agree to Moses’ demands, but as soon as the plague was lifted, his heart hardened and he would retract his promise. The outcome of the first nine plagues was terrible devastation of the land of Egypt, but the Israelites were not released. There was yet one more plague in store, the most terrible of all.<\/p>\n<h5>The First Passover<\/h5>\n<p>God told Moses that there remained one more plague in store for the Egyptians: “All the firstborn sons will die in every family in Egypt, from the oldest son of Pharaoh, who sits on the throne, to the oldest son of his lowliest slave. Even the firstborn of the animals will die” (Ex 11:5, <span>nlt<\/span>). Furthermore, he assured Moses that the plague would not touch a single household of the Hebrews, “Then you will know that the <span>Lord<\/span> makes a distinction between the Egyptians and the Israelites” (v 7, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>God instructed the people through Moses and Aaron to make their preparations for leaving the land in haste. They were to go to the Egyptians and ask them for their jewels of silver and gold (Ex 11:2-3), a request to which the Egyptians agreed, perhaps out of fear of the Hebrews and in the belief that the gifts would bring about an end of the terrors that had struck the land. The Hebrews were also instructed to prepare a lamb for each family—small families could share—for the last meal to be eaten in the land of Egypt (a rite that became the pattern for the Jewish observance of the Passover for many centuries). Blood of the lamb was to be put on the doorposts and lintels of the houses in which the Passover meal was being eaten that night. The Hebrews were promised that wherever the blood was on the door, no harm would come to that household. They were also instructed to prepare unleavened bread. At midnight the death angel of the Lord killed all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh himself to the lowest captive in a dungeon; not a single house of the Egyptians escaped tragedy. When Pharaoh saw what had happened, he ordered Moses and the people to leave the land at once (12:31-32). The biblical record says that about 600,000 Hebrew men left Egypt. Together with women and children, the total would have been in excess of 2 million people.<\/p>\n<h5>The Exodus from Egypt<\/h5>\n<p>The exodus is the central event of the OT and marks the birth of Israel as a nation. The Jewish people still look back to that event as the great redemptive act of God in history on behalf of his people, much as Christians look upon the cross as the great redemptive act of their faith.<\/p>\n\n<p>The exact route taken by the Hebrews out of Egypt cannot be determined today, though many possibilities have been proposed. They did not take the shortest, most direct route to Canaan (which would have been about a 10 days’ journey along the Mediterranean coastline), but set out in the direction of Mt Sinai, where Moses had earlier met God at the burning bush. As a sign that Moses had been sent to deliver the people, God told Moses he would bring them to that same spot, where they would worship God (Ex 3:12). The Hebrews did not forget the request of Joseph to carry his bones with them when they returned to their own land (Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19).<\/p>\n<p>As the people journeyed, they were preceded by a pillar of cloud during the day and a pillar of fire at night. The cloud represented the presence of God with his people and guided them along the route they should travel.<\/p>\n<p>Back in Egypt, Pharaoh was having second thoughts about letting the Hebrews leave the land and decided to pursue them with his army and bring them back. When the Hebrews saw the approaching cloud of dust and realized that the Egyptian army was pursuing them, they were terrified. The sea lay ahead of them and the Egyptians were behind; there seemed to be no way of escape. The people turned on Moses, blaming him for bringing them out of Egypt. God again assured them that they did not need to be afraid or do anything to defend themselves. He promised to fight the battle for them and give them victory (Ex 14:14).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord parted the water of the Sea of Reeds (traditionally but erroneously referred to as the Red Sea) by a strong east wind and allowed the Israelites to pass through the sea on dry ground to the other side. The Egyptians rushed after the Israelites, following them into the dry bed of the sea. But before they reached the other side, the waters rushed back together, destroying the Egyptian army in the midst of the sea and leaving the Israelites safe on the other side. The people celebrated their great deliverance in song (Ex 15) and then continued their journey. The narrative that follows describes the struggle of the Israelites to survive in the desert—problems of food and water, internal dissension, murmurings against Moses, and battles with enemies. Through all their experiences, Moses towers as the unifying force and great spiritual leader.<\/p>\n<p>In spite of having seen God’s great act of deliverance so recently, the faith of the Israelites was not strong. Three days later they came to a place where the water was not fit to drink, and they began complaining against Moses. The Lord showed Moses how to purify the water, and the people’s needs were satisfied (Ex 15:22-25). When they reached the wilderness of Sin, they complained again, this time because of lack of food. God met their need by supplying manna, a breadlike substance that would serve as their food until they came to Canaan (16:1-21). Later, camped at Rephidim, the people complained again, this time for lack of water. Once again God met their needs by supplying water from the rock at Horeb (17:1-7). The Amalekites attacked them while they were still camped at Rephidim, but God gave a great victory to the Israelites (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>Moses and the people reached Sinai and camped there. Jethro came to visit, bringing Moses’ wife and sons. Zipporah had apparently decided to return with her children to stay with her father rather than to go on to Egypt with Moses. It was a joyful reunion, and Jethro made a burnt offering and sacrifices to God (an act that has evoked the suggestion that Jethro was a true worshiper of God, though nothing is known of his links to the Hebrew faith). When Jethro observed Moses trying to settle all the disputes and problems of the Hebrews unaided, he proposed that Moses delegate responsibility for some of the lesser matters to able men chosen from among the people. Moses accepted the suggestion, and shortly afterward Jethro returned to his own land. He did not remain at Sinai to participate in the ratification of the covenant (Ex 18:13-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Giving of the Law at Sinai<\/h5>\n<p>God had kept his promises to Moses. He had delivered the Hebrews from their Egyptian bondage and brought them to the very place where he had commissioned Moses to be their leader. He was now ready to enter into a covenant relationship with Israel. Amid a spectacular and terrifying scene of lightning, thunder, thick clouds, fire, smoke, and earthquake, God descended to the top of Sinai and called Moses to come up the mountain, where he remained 40 days to receive the law that would become the basis of the covenant.<\/p>\n<p>At Sinai, God was revealed as the God who demands exclusive allegiance in all areas of life and, at the same time, as the God who desires personal fellowship with his people.<\/p>\n<h5>Apostasy of the People<\/h5>\n<p>While Moses tarried on Mt Sinai, the people below became impatient and skeptical about his return, so they went to Aaron and asked him to make idols for them to worship. They contributed the gold earrings they were wearing. “Then Aaron took the gold, melted it down, and molded and tooled it into the shape of a calf. The people exclaimed, ‘O Israel, these are the gods who brought you out of Egypt!’ ” (Ex 32:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). The next day they joined in the worship of the idol with sacrifices and revelry. God told Moses what was taking place below and angrily declared that he was going to destroy the people but would make a great nation of Moses and his descendants. Moses immediately interceded on behalf of the people, and God’s wrath abated. Moses descended the mountain, carrying the two tablets of stone on which the law had been written, but when he entered the camp and saw what was taking place, he could not restrain his anger. He threw the stone tablets to the ground, ground the golden calf to powder, mixed it with water, and forced the people to drink it. He turned angrily to Aaron and demanded an explanation for the great sin that had been committed. Aaron lamely tried to shift the blame by minimizing his own role: “I threw them [the gold] into the fire—and out came this calf!” (v 24, <span>nlt<\/span>). Moses called for volunteers to carry out God’s judgment on the people for the great sin they had committed. Men of the tribe of Levi responded and executed about 3,000 men. Later they were commended and rewarded (Dt 33:9-10). Moses again interceded for the people, requesting that he be destroyed with the rest if God could not forgive them. God relented and promised Moses that the angel of the Lord would go with them still (Ex 32:34).<\/p>\n<p>Then Moses made a special request that he might be allowed to see the glory of the Lord. God instructed Moses to hew out two more tablets of stone like the ones he had destroyed and to return to the top of the mountain the next day. There the Lord passed before him and proclaimed his name: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span>, I am the <span>Lord<\/span>, the merciful and gracious God. I am slow to anger and rich in unfailing love and faithfulness” (Ex 34:6, <span>nlt<\/span>). Moses remained on the mountain another 40 days, where he received renewed warnings against idolatry and further instructions from the Lord, together with another copy of the Ten Commandments on tablets of stone. When Moses came down from the mountain, he was not aware that the skin of his face shone as a result of talking with God. At first the people were afraid to come near him, but he called them together and repeated all the Lord had said to him on the mountain. Afterward, he covered his face with a veil, which he removed only when he went into the presence of the Lord. Paul said the purpose of the veil was to prevent the people from seeing the heavenly light gradually fade from Moses’ face (2 Cor 3:13).<\/p>\n<h5>The Tabernacle and Establishment of the Priesthood<\/h5>\n<p>When Moses went up to the mountain the first time to receive the law from God, he was instructed to collect materials to be used in the construction of the tabernacle or tent. Gold, silver, bronze, blue and purple and scarlet yarn, fine twined linen, goats’ hair, tanned rams’ skins, goatskins, and acacia wood would be needed, along with oil for the lamps, spices for the anointing oil and for the fragrant incense, onyx stones, and stones for setting (Ex 25:3-7). The pattern for construction was also given to him, together with the ritual to be used for the consecration of the priests. A man named Bezalel was put in charge of the construction of the tabernacle, assisted by Oholiab (31:1-6). The tabernacle was portable like a tent so that it could be taken down and moved from place to place as the Hebrews continued their journey toward Canaan.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to giving Moses directions for the tabernacle, God also instructed him concerning the sacrifices that were to be brought: the burnt offering, grain offering, peace offering, sin offering, and guilt offering (Lv 1–7). The solemn ceremony for ordaining Aaron and his sons as priests and for inaugurating the worship practices were to be performed by Moses (chs 8–9).<\/p>\n<p>Sometime after this solemn inauguration of the religious ritual actually took place, Nadab and Abihu, two of Aaron’s four sons, offered unauthorized fire before the Lord. A fire came out from the Lord and destroyed them. Moses forbade Aaron and his sons Eleazar and Ithamar to express grief because of the sinfulness of the act (Lv 10:1-7). The nature of their sin is difficult to determine, but it surely involved a violation of God’s holiness. Therefore, it is appropriate that a large part of the remainder of the book of Leviticus gives regulations that stress the holy living that God expected from his people.<\/p>\n<h5>From Sinai to Kadesh<\/h5>\n<p>A year had elapsed from the time the Israelites left Egypt until the census was taken (Nm 9:1). God reminded the people that it was time to observe the Passover, which they did, and a month later they set out from Sinai and came to the wilderness of Paran. Along the way they complained about the unvarying diet of manna and they longed for the fish, cucumbers, melons, leeks, onions, and garlic they had eaten in Egypt (11:4-6). In anger God sent quail in abundance, but even while the people were devouring the meat, God sent a great plague that killed many Israelites. The complaining attitude of the people was shared even by Miriam and Aaron. They began to speak against the Cushite woman Moses had married (12:1-2). It is not certain whether the Cushite was an Ethiopian or whether this was another way of referring to Zipporah. If Moses did marry a second time, no mention is made of it elsewhere in the OT. Moses made no reply to the accusations of his brother and sister. It was not necessary, for God intervened in defense of his servant. He smote Miriam with leprosy for her part in speaking against Moses, and when Aaron saw what had happened to Miriam, he acknowledged that they both had sinned. Miriam’s leprosy was removed in response to Moses’ fervent intercession.<\/p>\n\n<p>While the people were encamped at Kadesh (also called Kadesh-barnea—Nm 32:8) in the wilderness of Paran, Moses sent 12 men into Canaan, one from each tribe, to spy out the land in preparation for the Israelite entry. After 40 days the spies returned and, though they acknowledged that the land was fertile and inviting, 10 of them were afraid of the Canaanite inhabitants and advised against going into the land. Only Joshua and Caleb were willing to go ahead and occupy the territory. The entire congregation joined the protest against going in and determined to choose a new leader and return to Egypt rather than risk death by the sword in Canaan. They threatened to stone Moses and Aaron. At that moment God intervened and would have destroyed all the people on the spot except for the intervention of Moses (13:1–14:19). He declared that, if God did not bring the people into Canaan, the nations round about would conclude that the God of the Israelites was unable to bring them into the land. Once again God acquiesced to Moses’ request to pardon the people but said that none of them 20 years and older who had complained against him would be allowed to enter the land. All the people would wander in the wilderness for 40 years until that generation died, and then their children would be allowed to enter Canaan (14:29-33). When they heard the Lord’s sentence upon them, the people quickly decided to lift the sentence of judgment by entering the land at once, but God was not with them, and they suffered a disastrous defeat at the hands of the Amalekites and Canaanites.<\/p>\n<h5>Forty Years in the Wilderness<\/h5>\n<p>Very little is known about events during the 40 years of wilderness wanderings. In spite of the judgment that had already come upon them, the people did not seem to change their ways. A man named Korah led another rebellion against the authority of Moses and Aaron. God would not listen to the pleas of Moses and Aaron on behalf of these dissidents (Nm 16:22-24), but told the congregation to separate itself from the tents of Korah and his conspirators. While the people watched, the ground split open and swallowed up the rebellious factions together with their households and all their possessions. Though the rest of the Israelites witnessed the fate of the rebels, it did not deter them from again turning on Moses and Aaron. At this, God told Moses to remove himself from the murmuring congregation in order that he could take vengeance. Though Moses offered atonement for the people’s sins, 14,700 died by plague before the punishment was ended. To demonstrate further to the people that Moses was his chosen leader, the Lord instructed Moses to take rods, one for each tribe, and to deposit them in the tent of meeting. God would cause the rod of the man chosen by him to sprout, and so silence the murmurings of the people. The rod belonging to Aaron sprouted and budded and bloomed, but the people only complained more.<\/p>\n<p>As the people neared the end of their years of wilderness wanderings, Miriam died in Kadesh and was buried there (Nm 20:1). Soon after, the people began to complain once more for lack of water. God instructed Moses to speak to a rock that would bring forth water to satisfy the needs of the people. Instead of speaking to the rock, Moses struck it twice with his rod. The water came forth, but God rebuked Moses and Aaron: “Because you did not trust me enough to demonstrate my holiness to the people of Israel, you will not lead them into the land I am giving them!” (v 12, <span>nlt<\/span>). The nature of the sin is not clear, but Moses and Aaron were apparently taking to themselves honor that belonged to God alone. Because of the sin, they were denied the privilege of leading the Israelites into the Promised Land. The punishment may seem too severe for the sin, but it shows that the privileged role of leadership given to Moses and Aaron carried with it an unusual measure of responsibility.<\/p>\n<p>The people then journeyed from Kadesh to Mt Hor on the border of the land of Edom, where Aaron died. Moses took his priestly garments from him and gave them to Eleazar, his son, thereby transferring the priestly office (Nm 20:28).<\/p>\n<p>As the people came closer to their destination, resistance on the part of the native population increased. There was a skirmish with the king of Arad and his forces at Hormah, resulting in a victory for Israel (Nm 21:1-3). As they journeyed around Edom, some of the Israelites began speaking against God and Moses because there was no food or water and they were tired of eating manna. This time the Lord sent poisonous snakes among the people, and many of them died of the venomous bites. Those who had not yet been bitten came to Moses, acknowledged their sin, and asked that the serpents be removed from their midst. God instructed Moses to make a serpent of bronze and set it on a pole. If a person bitten by a serpent looked up at the bronze serpent, he or she would live.<\/p>\n<p>As the Israelites approached the territory of Sihon, king of the Amorites, they sent messengers asking permission to pass peaceably through his land. Instead of granting the request, Sihon gathered his army together and fought against Israel. He was killed in the battle, and his land and cities were taken and occupied by the Hebrews (Nm 21:21-25).<\/p>\n<h5>Arrival at the Jordan River<\/h5>\n<p>After their victory over Sihon, the Israelites set out again and encamped in the plains of Moab on the east side of the Jordan River facing Jericho, in full view of the Promised Land. The Moabites were terrified by the presence of these people because they had heard what happened to the Amorites. Their king, Balak, hired a magician named Balaam to curse the Israelites. Three times Balaam attempted to curse them, but each time God turned his words into a blessing (Nm 22–24). Though unable to curse the Israelites, Balaam was responsible for an even greater calamity. He advised the Moabites to entice the Israelites to sacrifice to their gods and bow down to them (Nm 25:1-3; 31:16; 2 Pt 2:15; Rv 2:14). While the people were worshiping the Moabite deity, Baal of Peor, God’s anger was kindled against them, and he sent a plague that killed 24,000 of them (Nm 25:9). It was Israel’s first encounter with the seductive allurement of licentious idolatry and an ominous foreview of what would happen after they settled down in Canaan. Their continued attraction to idolatry would be their final undoing.<\/p>\n<p>After the plague, God instructed Moses and Eleazar to take another census of the people like the one almost 40 years earlier. A whole generation of Israelites had died in the wilderness, but they had been replaced by an almost equal number, so that now there were 601,730 men 20 years and older who were able to go to war (Nm 26:51). Not a man remained of those who had been counted in the first census, except Caleb and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p>The Lord instructed Moses to lay hands on Joshua and commission him as the new leader in the sight of Eleazar the priest and all the congregation (Nm 27:12-23). In addition, the Lord gave Moses instructions concerning feasts and offerings and vows (chs 28–30). God ordered Moses, as his last act as leader, to avenge the Israelites on the Midianites. In that battle the armies of Israel gained a great victory over the Midianites, killing their kings, their men, and also Balaam.<\/p>\n<p>The Lord gave instructions to Moses concerning the boundaries that would mark the Promised Land and named the men who would divide the land among the tribes (Nm 34). He also ordered that 48 cities be given to the Levites, the priestly tribe, as their portion. Six of these were designated as cities of refuge where murderers could flee so that they would not be killed by those seeking vengeance without having an opportunity to stand before the congregation for judgment (ch 35).<\/p>\n<h5>Moses’ Death<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Deuteronomy has often been called Moses’ valedictory speech to the people, for in it Moses is not merely the chief speaker but the only speaker. With the congregation of his people gathered before him, he rehearsed all that God had done for them since leaving Sinai, and he reminded them of their failure to enter the Promised Land 38 years earlier (Dt 2:14). He recalled his plea that God would let him cross the Jordan and see the land that was to be the home of the people, but God responded that Moses would only be allowed to view the land from the top of Pisgah. Moses then exhorted the people to obey the statutes and ordinances that had been given to them in order to experience God’s blessings in the land.<\/p>\n\n<p>As the day of Moses’ death approached, the Lord ordered Moses and Joshua to present themselves at the tent of meeting in order for Joshua to be commissioned as the new leader (Dt 31:14-23). Before his death, Moses pronounced a blessing upon all the Israelites (ch 33). Having completed these tasks, Moses went up from the plains of Moab to Mt Nebo, and to the top of Pisgah. From there God showed him the land promised long ago to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob—the land that was soon to be the home of the wandering Israelite tribes. Again God told him that he would not be allowed to cross over the Jordan. Moses died there and God buried him somewhere in the valley in the land of Moab opposite Beth-peor (34:6). Moses was 120 years old when he died, and the Israelites mourned his death for 30 days. The finest tribute to Moses is found in the closing words of the book of Deuteronomy, “There has never been another prophet like Moses, whom the <span>Lord<\/span> knew face to face” (v 10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MosesintheNewTestament\">Moses in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>All Jews and Christians in apostolic times considered Moses the author of the Pentateuch. Such expressions as “the law of Moses” (Lk 2:22), “Moses commanded” (Mt 19:7), “Moses said” (Mk 7:10) “and Moses wrote” (12:19) shows that his name was synonymous with the OT books attributed to him. He is mentioned in the NT more than any other OT figure, a total of 79 times. His role as lawgiver is emphasized more than any other aspect of his life (Mt 8:4; Mk 7:10; Jn 1:17; Acts 15:1). He appears at the transfiguration of Jesus as the representative of OT law, along with Elijah as the representative of OT prophets (Mt 17:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>Moses’ role as prophet is also mentioned in the NT. As a prophet, he spoke of the coming Messiah and his sufferings (Lk 24:25-27; Acts 3:22). The NT also draws from the life and experiences of Moses to show patterns of life under the new covenant. The nativity story of Jesus parallels the Mosaic story of the infant deliverer being rescued from the evil designs of an earthly despot (Mt 2:13-18). Jesus’ proclamation of a new law in his Sermon on the Mount parallels the giving of the law at Sinai (Mt 5–7) and presents Jesus as the authoritative interpreter of the will of God. Contrast between the old law and the new relationship with God is especially marked in the book of Galatians. The comparison of Moses with Christ is an important emphasis of the book of Hebrews (Heb 3:5-6; 9:11-22). John contrasted the law that was given through Moses with the grace and truth that came through Jesus Christ (Jn 1:17). He also contrasted the manna in the wilderness to Jesus as “the bread of life” (6:30-35).<\/p>\n<p>Other references to Moses or to events associated with him include his birth (Acts 7:20; Heb 11:23), the burning bush (Lk 20:37), the magicians of Egypt (2 Tm 3:8), the Passover (Heb 11:28), the exodus (3:16), crossing of the sea (1 Cor 10:2), the covenant sacrifice at Sinai (Mt 26:28), the manna (1 Cor 10:3), the glory on Moses’ face (2 Cor 3:7-18), water from the rock (1 Cor 10:4), the bronze serpent (Jn 3:14), and the song of Moses (Rv 15:3).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Egypt, Egyptian; Exodus, The; Israel, History of; Plagues upon Egypt; Priests and Levites; Tabernacle; Temple; Commandments, The Ten; Wilderness Wanderings.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MOSES Great leader of the Hebrew people who brought them out of bondage in Egypt to the Promised Land in Canaan; also the one who gave them the law at Mt Sinai that became the basis for their religious faith through the centuries. Focused in this one person are the figures of prophet, priest, lawgiver, judge, intercessor, shepherd, miracle worker, and founder of a nation. The meaning of his name is uncertain. It has been explained as a Hebrew word meaning “to draw out” (Ex 2:10; cf. 2 Sm 22:1...","summary_en":"MOSES Great leader of the Hebrew people who brought them out of bondage in Egypt to the Promised Land in Canaan; also the one who gave them the law at Mt Sinai that became the basis for their religious faith through the centuries. Focused in this one person are the figures of prophet, priest, lawgiver, judge, intercessor, shepherd, miracle worker, and founder of a nation. The meaning of his name is uncertain. It has been explained as a Hebrew word meaning “to draw out” (Ex 2:10; cf. 2 Sm 22:1...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":37744,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Truth","title_en":"Truth","content_ro":"<h3>TRUTH<\/h3>\n<p>That which is real and verifiable by experience.<\/p>\n<p>In Scripture, truth is a very important concept because God is the God of all truth (Pss 31:5; 108:4; 146:6), who speaks and judges truly (57:3; 96:13). He is the real source and cause of the whole universe. Scripture also focuses on the revealed truth in the gospel of God’s redeeming grace through Christ. This is the truth Christ and the apostles proclaimed (Jn 8:44-46; 18:37; Rom 9:1; 2 Cor 4:2), which was foreshadowed in the OT (1 Pt 1:10-12), and witnessed to by the Holy Spirit (Jn 16:13). The OT teaching was never false, but it was shadowy and incomplete in comparison with the revealed truth of the NT. So Christ brought spiritual reality (Jn 1:17), and the Holy Spirit leads believers into the experience of all that is real in Christ (16:13).<\/p>\n<p>Christ is the truth because, being God, his words carry divine authority. They are truth and life (Jn 6:63). In addition, the life of Christ epitomized truthfulness and utter reliability. When people live in obedience to the truth, they themselves are true and reliable. Scripture calls upon people to “do the truth” (Jn 3:21, <span>kjv<\/span>). Those who have experienced God’s reality in Christ know, by experience, that Christ is the way, the truth, and the life (Jn 14:6).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>TRUTH<\/h3>\n<p>That which is real and verifiable by experience.<\/p>\n<p>In Scripture, truth is a very important concept because God is the God of all truth (Pss 31:5; 108:4; 146:6), who speaks and judges truly (57:3; 96:13). He is the real source and cause of the whole universe. Scripture also focuses on the revealed truth in the gospel of God’s redeeming grace through Christ. This is the truth Christ and the apostles proclaimed (Jn 8:44-46; 18:37; Rom 9:1; 2 Cor 4:2), which was foreshadowed in the OT (1 Pt 1:10-12), and witnessed to by the Holy Spirit (Jn 16:13). The OT teaching was never false, but it was shadowy and incomplete in comparison with the revealed truth of the NT. So Christ brought spiritual reality (Jn 1:17), and the Holy Spirit leads believers into the experience of all that is real in Christ (16:13).<\/p>\n<p>Christ is the truth because, being God, his words carry divine authority. They are truth and life (Jn 6:63). In addition, the life of Christ epitomized truthfulness and utter reliability. When people live in obedience to the truth, they themselves are true and reliable. Scripture calls upon people to “do the truth” (Jn 3:21, <span>kjv<\/span>). Those who have experienced God’s reality in Christ know, by experience, that Christ is the way, the truth, and the life (Jn 14:6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"TRUTH That which is real and verifiable by experience. In Scripture, truth is a very important concept because God is the God of all truth (Pss 31:5; 108:4; 146:6), who speaks and judges truly (57:3; 96:13). He is the real source and cause of the whole universe. Scripture also focuses on the revealed truth in the gospel of God’s redeeming grace through Christ. This is the truth Christ and the apostles proclaimed (Jn 8:44-46; 18:37; Rom 9:1; 2 Cor 4:2), which was foreshadowed in the OT (1 Pt 1...","summary_en":"TRUTH That which is real and verifiable by experience. In Scripture, truth is a very important concept because God is the God of all truth (Pss 31:5; 108:4; 146:6), who speaks and judges truly (57:3; 96:13). He is the real source and cause of the whole universe. Scripture also focuses on the revealed truth in the gospel of God’s redeeming grace through Christ. This is the truth Christ and the apostles proclaimed (Jn 8:44-46; 18:37; Rom 9:1; 2 Cor 4:2), which was foreshadowed in the OT (1 Pt 1...","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56318,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:17","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:17","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:17<\/strong> <em>the law:<\/em> That is, the <em>torah<\/em>, the body of instruction given to Moses at Mount Sinai. • Although <em>God’s unfailing love and faithfulness<\/em> are in the torah, these qualities are fully revealed in Christ (3:16; 13:1).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:17<\/strong> <em>the law:<\/em> That is, the <em>torah<\/em>, the body of instruction given to Moses at Mount Sinai. • Although <em>God’s unfailing love and faithfulness<\/em> are in the torah, these qualities are fully revealed in Christ (3:16; 13:1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:17 the law: That is, the torah, the body of instruction given to Moses at Mount Sinai. • Although God’s unfailing love and faithfulness are in the torah, these qualities are fully revealed in Christ (3:16; 13:1).","summary_en":"1:17 the law: That is, the torah, the body of instruction given to Moses at Mount Sinai. • Although God’s unfailing love and faithfulness are in the torah, these qualities are fully revealed in Christ (3:16; 13:1).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83944,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:17","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:17","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:17<\/strong> <em>the law:<\/em> That is, the <em>torah<\/em>, the body of instruction given to Moses at Mount Sinai. • Although <em>God’s unfailing love and faithfulness<\/em> are in the torah, these qualities are fully revealed in Christ (3:16; 13:1).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:17<\/strong> <em>the law:<\/em> That is, the <em>torah<\/em>, the body of instruction given to Moses at Mount Sinai. • Although <em>God’s unfailing love and faithfulness<\/em> are in the torah, these qualities are fully revealed in Christ (3:16; 13:1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:17 the law: That is, the torah, the body of instruction given to Moses at Mount Sinai. • Although God’s unfailing love and faithfulness are in the torah, these qualities are fully revealed in Christ (3:16; 13:1).","summary_en":"1:17 the law: That is, the torah, the body of instruction given to Moses at Mount Sinai. • Although God’s unfailing love and faithfulness are in the torah, these qualities are fully revealed in Christ (3:16; 13:1).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111570,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:17","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:17","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:17<\/strong> <em>the law:<\/em> That is, the <em>torah<\/em>, the body of instruction given to Moses at Mount Sinai. • Although <em>God’s unfailing love and faithfulness<\/em> are in the torah, these qualities are fully revealed in Christ (3:16; 13:1).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:17<\/strong> <em>the law:<\/em> That is, the <em>torah<\/em>, the body of instruction given to Moses at Mount Sinai. • Although <em>God’s unfailing love and faithfulness<\/em> are in the torah, these qualities are fully revealed in Christ (3:16; 13:1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:17 the law: That is, the torah, the body of instruction given to Moses at Mount Sinai. • Although God’s unfailing love and faithfulness are in the torah, these qualities are fully revealed in Christ (3:16; 13:1).","summary_en":"1:17 the law: That is, the torah, the body of instruction given to Moses at Mount Sinai. • Although God’s unfailing love and faithfulness are in the torah, these qualities are fully revealed in Christ (3:16; 13:1).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139196,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:17","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:17","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:17<\/strong> <em>the law:<\/em> That is, the <em>torah<\/em>, the body of instruction given to Moses at Mount Sinai. • Although <em>God’s unfailing love and faithfulness<\/em> are in the torah, these qualities are fully revealed in Christ (3:16; 13:1).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:17<\/strong> <em>the law:<\/em> That is, the <em>torah<\/em>, the body of instruction given to Moses at Mount Sinai. • Although <em>God’s unfailing love and faithfulness<\/em> are in the torah, these qualities are fully revealed in Christ (3:16; 13:1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:17 the law: That is, the torah, the body of instruction given to Moses at Mount Sinai. • Although God’s unfailing love and faithfulness are in the torah, these qualities are fully revealed in Christ (3:16; 13:1).","summary_en":"1:17 the law: That is, the torah, the body of instruction given to Moses at Mount Sinai. • Although God’s unfailing love and faithfulness are in the torah, these qualities are fully revealed in Christ (3:16; 13:1).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66724,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Unified Plan of Salvation","title_en":"God’s Unified Plan of Salvation","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Unified Plan of Salvation<\/h3>\n<p>God’s plan of salvation unfolds throughout Scripture, and the continuity of that plan is a central theme in Romans. In 3:21, Paul makes two important points about the new way of being “made right” with God that has been inaugurated in Jesus Christ. First, it does not depend on obeying the laws and regulations of the Old Testament. Second, it was “promised in the writings of Moses and the prophets” (3:21; see also 1:2). God has always planned to save the world through Jesus, and the Old Testament prepared his people for that climactic moment in salvation history. Paul keeps returning to this theme of continuity, especially in chs 9–11, where he shows how God’s dealings with Israel fit into that single, unfolding plan.<\/p>\n<p>At the same time, Paul is also concerned to help us understand the discontinuity in God’s single plan of salvation. That plan unfolds in stages. Now that the final stage in Christ has arrived, the prior stage—during which the law of Moses ruled over God’s people—has been left behind. Paul repeatedly emphasizes that our new relationship with God stands separate from the law of Moses (see 6:14; 7:4-6; 10:4). A similar point is made in John 1:17 and Heb 10:1. Paul’s recurring focus in Romans on the nature of God’s plan helps us to put the whole story of the Bible together in a way that honors all parts of his plan.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 1:21-23; Luke 1:46-55, 67-79; Acts 4:10-12; 10:34-43; 13:23-41; Rom 1:3-5, 16-17; 3:21-26; 5:6-11; 8:1-4; 10:5-13; 11:26-27; 1 Cor 15:1-4; Gal 2:14-21; 3:5-14; Eph 1:3-14; Col 1:15-22; 1 Tim 2:3-6; 2 Tim 1:9-10; Heb 9:27-28<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Unified Plan of Salvation<\/h3>\n<p>God’s plan of salvation unfolds throughout Scripture, and the continuity of that plan is a central theme in Romans. In 3:21, Paul makes two important points about the new way of being “made right” with God that has been inaugurated in Jesus Christ. First, it does not depend on obeying the laws and regulations of the Old Testament. Second, it was “promised in the writings of Moses and the prophets” (3:21; see also 1:2). God has always planned to save the world through Jesus, and the Old Testament prepared his people for that climactic moment in salvation history. Paul keeps returning to this theme of continuity, especially in chs 9–11, where he shows how God’s dealings with Israel fit into that single, unfolding plan.<\/p>\n<p>At the same time, Paul is also concerned to help us understand the discontinuity in God’s single plan of salvation. That plan unfolds in stages. Now that the final stage in Christ has arrived, the prior stage—during which the law of Moses ruled over God’s people—has been left behind. Paul repeatedly emphasizes that our new relationship with God stands separate from the law of Moses (see 6:14; 7:4-6; 10:4). A similar point is made in John 1:17 and Heb 10:1. Paul’s recurring focus in Romans on the nature of God’s plan helps us to put the whole story of the Bible together in a way that honors all parts of his plan.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 1:21-23; Luke 1:46-55, 67-79; Acts 4:10-12; 10:34-43; 13:23-41; Rom 1:3-5, 16-17; 3:21-26; 5:6-11; 8:1-4; 10:5-13; 11:26-27; 1 Cor 15:1-4; Gal 2:14-21; 3:5-14; Eph 1:3-14; Col 1:15-22; 1 Tim 2:3-6; 2 Tim 1:9-10; Heb 9:27-28<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Unified Plan of Salvation God’s plan of salvation unfolds throughout Scripture, and the continuity of that plan is a central theme in Romans. In 3:21, Paul makes two important points about the new way of being “made right” with God that has been inaugurated in Jesus Christ. First, it does not depend on obeying the laws and regulations of the Old Testament. Second, it was “promised in the writings of Moses and the prophets” (3:21; see also 1:2). God has always planned to save the world t...","summary_en":"God’s Unified Plan of Salvation God’s plan of salvation unfolds throughout Scripture, and the continuity of that plan is a central theme in Romans. In 3:21, Paul makes two important points about the new way of being “made right” with God that has been inaugurated in Jesus Christ. First, it does not depend on obeying the laws and regulations of the Old Testament. Second, it was “promised in the writings of Moses and the prophets” (3:21; see also 1:2). God has always planned to save the world t...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":94350,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Unified Plan of Salvation","title_en":"God’s Unified Plan of Salvation","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Unified Plan of Salvation<\/h3>\n<p>God’s plan of salvation unfolds throughout Scripture, and the continuity of that plan is a central theme in Romans. In 3:21, Paul makes two important points about the new way of being “made right” with God that has been inaugurated in Jesus Christ. First, it does not depend on obeying the laws and regulations of the Old Testament. Second, it was “promised in the writings of Moses and the prophets” (3:21; see also 1:2). God has always planned to save the world through Jesus, and the Old Testament prepared his people for that climactic moment in salvation history. Paul keeps returning to this theme of continuity, especially in chs 9–11, where he shows how God’s dealings with Israel fit into that single, unfolding plan.<\/p>\n<p>At the same time, Paul is also concerned to help us understand the discontinuity in God’s single plan of salvation. That plan unfolds in stages. Now that the final stage in Christ has arrived, the prior stage—during which the law of Moses ruled over God’s people—has been left behind. Paul repeatedly emphasizes that our new relationship with God stands separate from the law of Moses (see 6:14; 7:4-6; 10:4). A similar point is made in John 1:17 and Heb 10:1. Paul’s recurring focus in Romans on the nature of God’s plan helps us to put the whole story of the Bible together in a way that honors all parts of his plan.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 1:21-23; Luke 1:46-55, 67-79; Acts 4:10-12; 10:34-43; 13:23-41; Rom 1:3-5, 16-17; 3:21-26; 5:6-11; 8:1-4; 10:5-13; 11:26-27; 1 Cor 15:1-4; Gal 2:14-21; 3:5-14; Eph 1:3-14; Col 1:15-22; 1 Tim 2:3-6; 2 Tim 1:9-10; Heb 9:27-28<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Unified Plan of Salvation<\/h3>\n<p>God’s plan of salvation unfolds throughout Scripture, and the continuity of that plan is a central theme in Romans. In 3:21, Paul makes two important points about the new way of being “made right” with God that has been inaugurated in Jesus Christ. First, it does not depend on obeying the laws and regulations of the Old Testament. Second, it was “promised in the writings of Moses and the prophets” (3:21; see also 1:2). God has always planned to save the world through Jesus, and the Old Testament prepared his people for that climactic moment in salvation history. Paul keeps returning to this theme of continuity, especially in chs 9–11, where he shows how God’s dealings with Israel fit into that single, unfolding plan.<\/p>\n<p>At the same time, Paul is also concerned to help us understand the discontinuity in God’s single plan of salvation. That plan unfolds in stages. Now that the final stage in Christ has arrived, the prior stage—during which the law of Moses ruled over God’s people—has been left behind. Paul repeatedly emphasizes that our new relationship with God stands separate from the law of Moses (see 6:14; 7:4-6; 10:4). A similar point is made in John 1:17 and Heb 10:1. Paul’s recurring focus in Romans on the nature of God’s plan helps us to put the whole story of the Bible together in a way that honors all parts of his plan.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 1:21-23; Luke 1:46-55, 67-79; Acts 4:10-12; 10:34-43; 13:23-41; Rom 1:3-5, 16-17; 3:21-26; 5:6-11; 8:1-4; 10:5-13; 11:26-27; 1 Cor 15:1-4; Gal 2:14-21; 3:5-14; Eph 1:3-14; Col 1:15-22; 1 Tim 2:3-6; 2 Tim 1:9-10; Heb 9:27-28<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Unified Plan of Salvation God’s plan of salvation unfolds throughout Scripture, and the continuity of that plan is a central theme in Romans. In 3:21, Paul makes two important points about the new way of being “made right” with God that has been inaugurated in Jesus Christ. First, it does not depend on obeying the laws and regulations of the Old Testament. Second, it was “promised in the writings of Moses and the prophets” (3:21; see also 1:2). God has always planned to save the world t...","summary_en":"God’s Unified Plan of Salvation God’s plan of salvation unfolds throughout Scripture, and the continuity of that plan is a central theme in Romans. In 3:21, Paul makes two important points about the new way of being “made right” with God that has been inaugurated in Jesus Christ. First, it does not depend on obeying the laws and regulations of the Old Testament. Second, it was “promised in the writings of Moses and the prophets” (3:21; see also 1:2). God has always planned to save the world t...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121976,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Unified Plan of Salvation","title_en":"God’s Unified Plan of Salvation","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Unified Plan of Salvation<\/h3>\n<p>God’s plan of salvation unfolds throughout Scripture, and the continuity of that plan is a central theme in Romans. In 3:21, Paul makes two important points about the new way of being “made right” with God that has been inaugurated in Jesus Christ. First, it does not depend on obeying the laws and regulations of the Old Testament. Second, it was “promised in the writings of Moses and the prophets” (3:21; see also 1:2). God has always planned to save the world through Jesus, and the Old Testament prepared his people for that climactic moment in salvation history. Paul keeps returning to this theme of continuity, especially in chs 9–11, where he shows how God’s dealings with Israel fit into that single, unfolding plan.<\/p>\n<p>At the same time, Paul is also concerned to help us understand the discontinuity in God’s single plan of salvation. That plan unfolds in stages. Now that the final stage in Christ has arrived, the prior stage—during which the law of Moses ruled over God’s people—has been left behind. Paul repeatedly emphasizes that our new relationship with God stands separate from the law of Moses (see 6:14; 7:4-6; 10:4). A similar point is made in John 1:17 and Heb 10:1. Paul’s recurring focus in Romans on the nature of God’s plan helps us to put the whole story of the Bible together in a way that honors all parts of his plan.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 1:21-23; Luke 1:46-55, 67-79; Acts 4:10-12; 10:34-43; 13:23-41; Rom 1:3-5, 16-17; 3:21-26; 5:6-11; 8:1-4; 10:5-13; 11:26-27; 1 Cor 15:1-4; Gal 2:14-21; 3:5-14; Eph 1:3-14; Col 1:15-22; 1 Tim 2:3-6; 2 Tim 1:9-10; Heb 9:27-28<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Unified Plan of Salvation<\/h3>\n<p>God’s plan of salvation unfolds throughout Scripture, and the continuity of that plan is a central theme in Romans. In 3:21, Paul makes two important points about the new way of being “made right” with God that has been inaugurated in Jesus Christ. First, it does not depend on obeying the laws and regulations of the Old Testament. Second, it was “promised in the writings of Moses and the prophets” (3:21; see also 1:2). God has always planned to save the world through Jesus, and the Old Testament prepared his people for that climactic moment in salvation history. Paul keeps returning to this theme of continuity, especially in chs 9–11, where he shows how God’s dealings with Israel fit into that single, unfolding plan.<\/p>\n<p>At the same time, Paul is also concerned to help us understand the discontinuity in God’s single plan of salvation. That plan unfolds in stages. Now that the final stage in Christ has arrived, the prior stage—during which the law of Moses ruled over God’s people—has been left behind. Paul repeatedly emphasizes that our new relationship with God stands separate from the law of Moses (see 6:14; 7:4-6; 10:4). A similar point is made in John 1:17 and Heb 10:1. Paul’s recurring focus in Romans on the nature of God’s plan helps us to put the whole story of the Bible together in a way that honors all parts of his plan.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 1:21-23; Luke 1:46-55, 67-79; Acts 4:10-12; 10:34-43; 13:23-41; Rom 1:3-5, 16-17; 3:21-26; 5:6-11; 8:1-4; 10:5-13; 11:26-27; 1 Cor 15:1-4; Gal 2:14-21; 3:5-14; Eph 1:3-14; Col 1:15-22; 1 Tim 2:3-6; 2 Tim 1:9-10; Heb 9:27-28<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Unified Plan of Salvation God’s plan of salvation unfolds throughout Scripture, and the continuity of that plan is a central theme in Romans. In 3:21, Paul makes two important points about the new way of being “made right” with God that has been inaugurated in Jesus Christ. First, it does not depend on obeying the laws and regulations of the Old Testament. Second, it was “promised in the writings of Moses and the prophets” (3:21; see also 1:2). God has always planned to save the world t...","summary_en":"God’s Unified Plan of Salvation God’s plan of salvation unfolds throughout Scripture, and the continuity of that plan is a central theme in Romans. In 3:21, Paul makes two important points about the new way of being “made right” with God that has been inaugurated in Jesus Christ. First, it does not depend on obeying the laws and regulations of the Old Testament. Second, it was “promised in the writings of Moses and the prophets” (3:21; see also 1:2). God has always planned to save the world t...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":149602,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Unified Plan of Salvation","title_en":"God’s Unified Plan of Salvation","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Unified Plan of Salvation<\/h3>\n<p>God’s plan of salvation unfolds throughout Scripture, and the continuity of that plan is a central theme in Romans. In 3:21, Paul makes two important points about the new way of being “made right” with God that has been inaugurated in Jesus Christ. First, it does not depend on obeying the laws and regulations of the Old Testament. Second, it was “promised in the writings of Moses and the prophets” (3:21; see also 1:2). God has always planned to save the world through Jesus, and the Old Testament prepared his people for that climactic moment in salvation history. Paul keeps returning to this theme of continuity, especially in chs 9–11, where he shows how God’s dealings with Israel fit into that single, unfolding plan.<\/p>\n<p>At the same time, Paul is also concerned to help us understand the discontinuity in God’s single plan of salvation. That plan unfolds in stages. Now that the final stage in Christ has arrived, the prior stage—during which the law of Moses ruled over God’s people—has been left behind. Paul repeatedly emphasizes that our new relationship with God stands separate from the law of Moses (see 6:14; 7:4-6; 10:4). A similar point is made in John 1:17 and Heb 10:1. Paul’s recurring focus in Romans on the nature of God’s plan helps us to put the whole story of the Bible together in a way that honors all parts of his plan.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 1:21-23; Luke 1:46-55, 67-79; Acts 4:10-12; 10:34-43; 13:23-41; Rom 1:3-5, 16-17; 3:21-26; 5:6-11; 8:1-4; 10:5-13; 11:26-27; 1 Cor 15:1-4; Gal 2:14-21; 3:5-14; Eph 1:3-14; Col 1:15-22; 1 Tim 2:3-6; 2 Tim 1:9-10; Heb 9:27-28<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Unified Plan of Salvation<\/h3>\n<p>God’s plan of salvation unfolds throughout Scripture, and the continuity of that plan is a central theme in Romans. In 3:21, Paul makes two important points about the new way of being “made right” with God that has been inaugurated in Jesus Christ. First, it does not depend on obeying the laws and regulations of the Old Testament. Second, it was “promised in the writings of Moses and the prophets” (3:21; see also 1:2). God has always planned to save the world through Jesus, and the Old Testament prepared his people for that climactic moment in salvation history. Paul keeps returning to this theme of continuity, especially in chs 9–11, where he shows how God’s dealings with Israel fit into that single, unfolding plan.<\/p>\n<p>At the same time, Paul is also concerned to help us understand the discontinuity in God’s single plan of salvation. That plan unfolds in stages. Now that the final stage in Christ has arrived, the prior stage—during which the law of Moses ruled over God’s people—has been left behind. Paul repeatedly emphasizes that our new relationship with God stands separate from the law of Moses (see 6:14; 7:4-6; 10:4). A similar point is made in John 1:17 and Heb 10:1. Paul’s recurring focus in Romans on the nature of God’s plan helps us to put the whole story of the Bible together in a way that honors all parts of his plan.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 1:21-23; Luke 1:46-55, 67-79; Acts 4:10-12; 10:34-43; 13:23-41; Rom 1:3-5, 16-17; 3:21-26; 5:6-11; 8:1-4; 10:5-13; 11:26-27; 1 Cor 15:1-4; Gal 2:14-21; 3:5-14; Eph 1:3-14; Col 1:15-22; 1 Tim 2:3-6; 2 Tim 1:9-10; Heb 9:27-28<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Unified Plan of Salvation God’s plan of salvation unfolds throughout Scripture, and the continuity of that plan is a central theme in Romans. In 3:21, Paul makes two important points about the new way of being “made right” with God that has been inaugurated in Jesus Christ. First, it does not depend on obeying the laws and regulations of the Old Testament. Second, it was “promised in the writings of Moses and the prophets” (3:21; see also 1:2). God has always planned to save the world t...","summary_en":"God’s Unified Plan of Salvation God’s plan of salvation unfolds throughout Scripture, and the continuity of that plan is a central theme in Romans. In 3:21, Paul makes two important points about the new way of being “made right” with God that has been inaugurated in Jesus Christ. First, it does not depend on obeying the laws and regulations of the Old Testament. Second, it was “promised in the writings of Moses and the prophets” (3:21; see also 1:2). God has always planned to save the world t...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"18":[{"id":7266,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Commandment, the New","title_en":"Commandment, the New","content_ro":"<h3>COMMANDMENT, The New<\/h3>\n<p>Christ’s commandment for Christians to love each other. The phrase “new commandment” occurs four times in the NT, all in the writings of John (Jn 13:34; 1 Jn 2:7, 8; 2 Jn 1:5). Initially, it was a command given by Jesus to his disciples on the night of his arrest: “I am giving you a new commandment: Love each other. Just as I have loved you, you should love each other” (Jn 13:34, <span>nlt<\/span>). The same command occurs elsewhere (Jn 15:12, 17; Rom 13:8; 1 Pt 1:22; 1 Jn 3:11, 23; 4:7, 11-12) but is not called “new” in those passages.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LoveasaCommandment\">Love as a Commandment<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had already commanded his disciples to love their enemies (Mt 5:43-45) and to love their neighbors as themselves (Lk 10:25-37). The “new commandment” demanded that Christians love each other. In no sense did it overrule the other two love commands. Jesus’ command to love those within the church was intended to produce a compelling testimony to those outside the church. It would offer them demonstrable proof (1) that his followers were Christlike in their love toward one another; (2) that the basis for vital human community could be found “in Christ”; and (3) that, by extension, what Jesus said about himself and his work was really true (Jn 13:35; 17:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus chose the word used to describe the OT law, giving similar authority to his new commandment. In fact, the law included commands to love (Lv 19:18, 34; Dt 10:19). The apostle Paul thought of love as the “law of Christ” (Gal 6:2), and James called the love command “the royal law” (Jas 2:8) and “the perfect law of liberty” (1:25; 2:12).<\/p>\n<p>The word “commandment” had another meaning as well. Many Jews in Jesus’ day wrongly supposed that the commandments were given in order that men, by obeying them, could show themselves worthy of God’s blessing (Rom 8:3; Gal 3:2). Jesus made it clear, however, that love was a natural result of God’s blessing, not a necessary condition for it. For Jesus, the commandment expressed how one who is already living in the joy of God’s blessing should act. Disciples were commanded to love in the same sense that branches were “commanded” to bear fruit: the branch by abiding in the vine, the Christian by abiding in Christ (Jn 15:4).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WhatMadeItNew\">What Made It New?<\/p>\n<p>The character of the new commandment comes from the “new covenant” (Jer 31:31-34; Lk 22:20; 1 Cor 11:25), which Jesus inaugurated at the Last Supper. Under the new covenant, God “writes” his law on the hearts of believers (Heb 10:16). That is, he actively works in them in the person of the Holy Spirit (Ez 36:27; 2 Cor 3:3), and gives them a new willingness to obey him (Rom 8:4; Gal 5:16). The new commandment of love is the all-embracing, single requirement of the new covenant (Rom 13:8, 10; Gal 5:14). Obedience, therefore, is a gift, because “love is from God; and every one who loves is born of God” (1 Jn 4:7, <span>nasb<\/span>). It is the fruit of faith (3:23) and part of the gospel itself (v 11).<\/p>\n<p>The close relationship between the new covenant and the new commandment may explain partly why the command to love was called “new.” Christ’s incarnation inaugurated a new age. “The darkness is disappearing,” John wrote, “and the true light is already shining” (1 Jn 2:8, <span>nlt<\/span>). Anticipating his ascension into heaven (Jn 13:33-35), Jesus left one inclusive commandment to preserve his disciples in the new age until its consummation at the Judgment Day (Jn 5:28-29; 1 Jn 4:17). Obedience to the new commandment was supposed to identify them as Jesus’ disciples during his absence (Jn 13:35; 17:21-23). The love command was thus new in the sense that it had a special function in the new age.<\/p>\n<p>What made the age new was that Jesus Christ’s coming had revealed God the Father with an unprecedented and incomparable clarity (Jn 1:18; 10:30; 17:6-8). No prophet had ever been able to say, “Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father” (14:9, <span>niv<\/span>). Therefore Jesus’ demand that the disciples love each other “as I have loved you” (13:34) was, by every human standard, new and astonishing. No human had ever loved perfectly like Jesus (v 1). To follow his example of love, then, was a new commandment. The greatness of Jesus’ love moved him to “lay down his life for his friends” (15:13, <span>niv<\/span>). Accordingly, John drew the conclusion that “we ought to lay down our lives for our brothers” (1 Jn 3:16, <span>niv<\/span>). It follows that love means never shutting one’s heart against another Christian in need (v 17), but rather rejoicing to sacrifice one’s temporal good for another’s blessing.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Commandments, The Ten; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COMMANDMENT, The New<\/h3>\n<p>Christ’s commandment for Christians to love each other. The phrase “new commandment” occurs four times in the NT, all in the writings of John (Jn 13:34; 1 Jn 2:7, 8; 2 Jn 1:5). Initially, it was a command given by Jesus to his disciples on the night of his arrest: “I am giving you a new commandment: Love each other. Just as I have loved you, you should love each other” (Jn 13:34, <span>nlt<\/span>). The same command occurs elsewhere (Jn 15:12, 17; Rom 13:8; 1 Pt 1:22; 1 Jn 3:11, 23; 4:7, 11-12) but is not called “new” in those passages.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LoveasaCommandment\">Love as a Commandment<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had already commanded his disciples to love their enemies (Mt 5:43-45) and to love their neighbors as themselves (Lk 10:25-37). The “new commandment” demanded that Christians love each other. In no sense did it overrule the other two love commands. Jesus’ command to love those within the church was intended to produce a compelling testimony to those outside the church. It would offer them demonstrable proof (1) that his followers were Christlike in their love toward one another; (2) that the basis for vital human community could be found “in Christ”; and (3) that, by extension, what Jesus said about himself and his work was really true (Jn 13:35; 17:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus chose the word used to describe the OT law, giving similar authority to his new commandment. In fact, the law included commands to love (Lv 19:18, 34; Dt 10:19). The apostle Paul thought of love as the “law of Christ” (Gal 6:2), and James called the love command “the royal law” (Jas 2:8) and “the perfect law of liberty” (1:25; 2:12).<\/p>\n<p>The word “commandment” had another meaning as well. Many Jews in Jesus’ day wrongly supposed that the commandments were given in order that men, by obeying them, could show themselves worthy of God’s blessing (Rom 8:3; Gal 3:2). Jesus made it clear, however, that love was a natural result of God’s blessing, not a necessary condition for it. For Jesus, the commandment expressed how one who is already living in the joy of God’s blessing should act. Disciples were commanded to love in the same sense that branches were “commanded” to bear fruit: the branch by abiding in the vine, the Christian by abiding in Christ (Jn 15:4).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WhatMadeItNew\">What Made It New?<\/p>\n<p>The character of the new commandment comes from the “new covenant” (Jer 31:31-34; Lk 22:20; 1 Cor 11:25), which Jesus inaugurated at the Last Supper. Under the new covenant, God “writes” his law on the hearts of believers (Heb 10:16). That is, he actively works in them in the person of the Holy Spirit (Ez 36:27; 2 Cor 3:3), and gives them a new willingness to obey him (Rom 8:4; Gal 5:16). The new commandment of love is the all-embracing, single requirement of the new covenant (Rom 13:8, 10; Gal 5:14). Obedience, therefore, is a gift, because “love is from God; and every one who loves is born of God” (1 Jn 4:7, <span>nasb<\/span>). It is the fruit of faith (3:23) and part of the gospel itself (v 11).<\/p>\n<p>The close relationship between the new covenant and the new commandment may explain partly why the command to love was called “new.” Christ’s incarnation inaugurated a new age. “The darkness is disappearing,” John wrote, “and the true light is already shining” (1 Jn 2:8, <span>nlt<\/span>). Anticipating his ascension into heaven (Jn 13:33-35), Jesus left one inclusive commandment to preserve his disciples in the new age until its consummation at the Judgment Day (Jn 5:28-29; 1 Jn 4:17). Obedience to the new commandment was supposed to identify them as Jesus’ disciples during his absence (Jn 13:35; 17:21-23). The love command was thus new in the sense that it had a special function in the new age.<\/p>\n<p>What made the age new was that Jesus Christ’s coming had revealed God the Father with an unprecedented and incomparable clarity (Jn 1:18; 10:30; 17:6-8). No prophet had ever been able to say, “Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father” (14:9, <span>niv<\/span>). Therefore Jesus’ demand that the disciples love each other “as I have loved you” (13:34) was, by every human standard, new and astonishing. No human had ever loved perfectly like Jesus (v 1). To follow his example of love, then, was a new commandment. The greatness of Jesus’ love moved him to “lay down his life for his friends” (15:13, <span>niv<\/span>). Accordingly, John drew the conclusion that “we ought to lay down our lives for our brothers” (1 Jn 3:16, <span>niv<\/span>). It follows that love means never shutting one’s heart against another Christian in need (v 17), but rather rejoicing to sacrifice one’s temporal good for another’s blessing.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Commandments, The Ten; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COMMANDMENT, The New Christ’s commandment for Christians to love each other. The phrase “new commandment” occurs four times in the NT, all in the writings of John (Jn 13:34; 1 Jn 2:7, 8; 2 Jn 1:5). Initially, it was a command given by Jesus to his disciples on the night of his arrest: “I am giving you a new commandment: Love each other. Just as I have loved you, you should love each other” (Jn 13:34, nlt). The same command occurs elsewhere (Jn 15:12, 17; Rom 13:8; 1 Pt 1:22; 1 Jn 3:11, 23; 4:...","summary_en":"COMMANDMENT, The New Christ’s commandment for Christians to love each other. The phrase “new commandment” occurs four times in the NT, all in the writings of John (Jn 13:34; 1 Jn 2:7, 8; 2 Jn 1:5). Initially, it was a command given by Jesus to his disciples on the night of his arrest: “I am giving you a new commandment: Love each other. Just as I have loved you, you should love each other” (Jn 13:34, nlt). The same command occurs elsewhere (Jn 15:12, 17; Rom 13:8; 1 Pt 1:22; 1 Jn 3:11, 23; 4:...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":11217,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Eternal Life","title_en":"Eternal Life","content_ro":"<h3>ETERNAL LIFE<\/h3>\n<p>Mode of existence referred to in Scripture characterized by either timelessness or immortality; kind of life attributed to God and distributed to believers. The perspective of the biblical writers flowed from an understanding of a living God who existed prior to the world’s creation and who will continue to exist when the end of time arrives. God’s gift to those who are obedient and responsible to him is designated as “eternal life” or some such synonym. John’s Gospel provides the most definitive material on eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>The phrase “eternal life” occurs only once in the Greek version of the OT (Dn 12:2, with the basic meaning of “the life of the age,” designating the life of the age beyond the resurrection from the dead). The primary meaning of “life” in the OT, however, is the quality of well-being in earthly existence.<\/p>\n<p>In the intertestamental period, the rabbinic distinction between “this age” and “the age which is to come” emphasized that the concept of life in the new age consists of a qualitative, rather than simply a quantitative, distinction from the present age.<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word translated “eternal” is derived from the word for “age” or “eon.” The setting of the NT within the context of Judaism, with its concept of a living God and the consequent promise of “the age which is to come,” gives depth and color to the meaning of the adjective “eternal.” Jesus Christ’s coming as God’s definitive revelation brings the possibility of the qualities of life in the future messianic age into present reality.<\/p>\n<p>The rich young ruler came to Jesus and asked for directions on how to inherit eternal life (Mk 10:17). He was obviously thinking of resurrection in the age to come. Jesus answered in the same terms (v 30).<\/p>\n<p>In his response to the rich young ruler, Jesus equated the reception of eternal life with entrance into the kingdom of God (Mk 10:23-25). The kingdom of God is not simply a future event but is already inaugurated in Jesus’ life, ministry, and teachings. The kingdom is a gift of life available while the follower still lives within the present age. Many of Jesus’ parables emphasize this point (e.g., those in Mt 13). The Beatitudes in the Sermon on the Mount (5:3-12) reinforce the concept of a present blessedness that includes salvation, forgiveness, and righteousness. Thus eternal life is a present blessing available to those who submit to God’s reign and are enjoying the blessing of this new era of salvation before the final consummation at the present age’s end.<\/p>\n<p>The definitive discussion of eternal life comes from John’s Gospel. John’s purpose delineates the crucial significance of the concept: “But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name” (Jn 20:31, <span>rsv<\/span>). The earliest Johannine reference to eternal life is found in John 3:15.<\/p>\n<p>John clearly shared in the Jewish expectation of the age to come with its anticipated blessings (e.g., Jn 3:36; 4:14; 5:29, 39; 6:27; 12:25). Eternal life is defined by the special gifts of the messianic age when it arrives at consummation. Lazarus’s resurrection (ch 11) was a living parable demonstrating the future life available to those who trust in Christ. Martha, before her brother’s actual resurrection, asserted her belief that Lazarus would be raised on the last day (v 24). Jesus responded that he himself is the resurrection and the life, and that those who believe in him will never die, even if they die physically (vv 25-26).<\/p>\n<p>The central emphasis of John’s Gospel, however, does not lie in the anticipated future but in the present experience of that future life. The life of the age to come is already available in Christ to the believer. The metaphors with which Jesus defined his own mission emphasize the present new life: living water that is a spring of water welling up to eternal life (Jn 4:10-14); living bread that satisfies the world’s spiritual hunger (6:35-40); the light of the world who leads his followers into the light of life (8:12); the good shepherd who brings abundant life (10:10); the life giver who raises the dead (11:25); the way, the truth, and the life (14:6); and the genuine vine who sustains those who abide in him (15:5).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was very careful to note that the accomplishment of his mission did not rest in his own nature and ability but in the Father who sent him. Jesus’ submission to the Father highlights again the fact that life is a gift of God. Those who believe in the Son of God are recipients of the life that God alone gives—eternal life. Thus the promise of resurrection for all believers, made explicit in Lazarus’s resurrection and guaranteed in Christ’s resurrection as the “firstfruits” (in Pauline terminology, <span>kjv<\/span> 1 Cor 15:23), is the natural consequence of God’s gift (Jn 5:26-29).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus added further content to the concept of eternal life by connecting it with knowing the true God (Jn 17:3). In Greek thought, knowledge referred to the result of either contemplation or mystical ecstasy. In the OT, however, knowledge meant experience, relationship, fellowship, and concern (cf. Jer 31:34). This connotation of knowledge as intimate relationship is underlined by the usage of the verb form to designate sexual relations between male and female (cf. Gn 4:1). Jesus stated, “I am the good shepherd; I know my own and my own know me, as the Father knows me and I know the Father” (Jn 10:14-15, <span>rsv<\/span>). The intimate and mutual relationship of Father and Son is the model for the relationship of the Son and his disciples. This knowledge does not come by education or manipulation of the mind but by revelation through the Son (1:18; cf. 14:7).<\/p>\n<p>A brief survey of the primary elements in the concept of eternal life clearly shows that it is not simply an endless or everlasting life. Although there are no final boundaries to eternal life, the Bible’s primary emphasis is on the quality of life, especially its divine elements. Eternal life is the importation of the qualities of the age to come into the present through the revelation of a faithful God in Christ, and it brings knowledge of God’s relationship with him.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Life; New Creation, New Creature; Regeneration.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ETERNAL LIFE<\/h3>\n<p>Mode of existence referred to in Scripture characterized by either timelessness or immortality; kind of life attributed to God and distributed to believers. The perspective of the biblical writers flowed from an understanding of a living God who existed prior to the world’s creation and who will continue to exist when the end of time arrives. God’s gift to those who are obedient and responsible to him is designated as “eternal life” or some such synonym. John’s Gospel provides the most definitive material on eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>The phrase “eternal life” occurs only once in the Greek version of the OT (Dn 12:2, with the basic meaning of “the life of the age,” designating the life of the age beyond the resurrection from the dead). The primary meaning of “life” in the OT, however, is the quality of well-being in earthly existence.<\/p>\n<p>In the intertestamental period, the rabbinic distinction between “this age” and “the age which is to come” emphasized that the concept of life in the new age consists of a qualitative, rather than simply a quantitative, distinction from the present age.<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word translated “eternal” is derived from the word for “age” or “eon.” The setting of the NT within the context of Judaism, with its concept of a living God and the consequent promise of “the age which is to come,” gives depth and color to the meaning of the adjective “eternal.” Jesus Christ’s coming as God’s definitive revelation brings the possibility of the qualities of life in the future messianic age into present reality.<\/p>\n<p>The rich young ruler came to Jesus and asked for directions on how to inherit eternal life (Mk 10:17). He was obviously thinking of resurrection in the age to come. Jesus answered in the same terms (v 30).<\/p>\n<p>In his response to the rich young ruler, Jesus equated the reception of eternal life with entrance into the kingdom of God (Mk 10:23-25). The kingdom of God is not simply a future event but is already inaugurated in Jesus’ life, ministry, and teachings. The kingdom is a gift of life available while the follower still lives within the present age. Many of Jesus’ parables emphasize this point (e.g., those in Mt 13). The Beatitudes in the Sermon on the Mount (5:3-12) reinforce the concept of a present blessedness that includes salvation, forgiveness, and righteousness. Thus eternal life is a present blessing available to those who submit to God’s reign and are enjoying the blessing of this new era of salvation before the final consummation at the present age’s end.<\/p>\n<p>The definitive discussion of eternal life comes from John’s Gospel. John’s purpose delineates the crucial significance of the concept: “But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name” (Jn 20:31, <span>rsv<\/span>). The earliest Johannine reference to eternal life is found in John 3:15.<\/p>\n<p>John clearly shared in the Jewish expectation of the age to come with its anticipated blessings (e.g., Jn 3:36; 4:14; 5:29, 39; 6:27; 12:25). Eternal life is defined by the special gifts of the messianic age when it arrives at consummation. Lazarus’s resurrection (ch 11) was a living parable demonstrating the future life available to those who trust in Christ. Martha, before her brother’s actual resurrection, asserted her belief that Lazarus would be raised on the last day (v 24). Jesus responded that he himself is the resurrection and the life, and that those who believe in him will never die, even if they die physically (vv 25-26).<\/p>\n<p>The central emphasis of John’s Gospel, however, does not lie in the anticipated future but in the present experience of that future life. The life of the age to come is already available in Christ to the believer. The metaphors with which Jesus defined his own mission emphasize the present new life: living water that is a spring of water welling up to eternal life (Jn 4:10-14); living bread that satisfies the world’s spiritual hunger (6:35-40); the light of the world who leads his followers into the light of life (8:12); the good shepherd who brings abundant life (10:10); the life giver who raises the dead (11:25); the way, the truth, and the life (14:6); and the genuine vine who sustains those who abide in him (15:5).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was very careful to note that the accomplishment of his mission did not rest in his own nature and ability but in the Father who sent him. Jesus’ submission to the Father highlights again the fact that life is a gift of God. Those who believe in the Son of God are recipients of the life that God alone gives—eternal life. Thus the promise of resurrection for all believers, made explicit in Lazarus’s resurrection and guaranteed in Christ’s resurrection as the “firstfruits” (in Pauline terminology, <span>kjv<\/span> 1 Cor 15:23), is the natural consequence of God’s gift (Jn 5:26-29).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus added further content to the concept of eternal life by connecting it with knowing the true God (Jn 17:3). In Greek thought, knowledge referred to the result of either contemplation or mystical ecstasy. In the OT, however, knowledge meant experience, relationship, fellowship, and concern (cf. Jer 31:34). This connotation of knowledge as intimate relationship is underlined by the usage of the verb form to designate sexual relations between male and female (cf. Gn 4:1). Jesus stated, “I am the good shepherd; I know my own and my own know me, as the Father knows me and I know the Father” (Jn 10:14-15, <span>rsv<\/span>). The intimate and mutual relationship of Father and Son is the model for the relationship of the Son and his disciples. This knowledge does not come by education or manipulation of the mind but by revelation through the Son (1:18; cf. 14:7).<\/p>\n<p>A brief survey of the primary elements in the concept of eternal life clearly shows that it is not simply an endless or everlasting life. Although there are no final boundaries to eternal life, the Bible’s primary emphasis is on the quality of life, especially its divine elements. Eternal life is the importation of the qualities of the age to come into the present through the revelation of a faithful God in Christ, and it brings knowledge of God’s relationship with him.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Life; New Creation, New Creature; Regeneration.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ETERNAL LIFE Mode of existence referred to in Scripture characterized by either timelessness or immortality; kind of life attributed to God and distributed to believers. The perspective of the biblical writers flowed from an understanding of a living God who existed prior to the world’s creation and who will continue to exist when the end of time arrives. God’s gift to those who are obedient and responsible to him is designated as “eternal life” or some such synonym. John’s Gospel provides th...","summary_en":"ETERNAL LIFE Mode of existence referred to in Scripture characterized by either timelessness or immortality; kind of life attributed to God and distributed to believers. The perspective of the biblical writers flowed from an understanding of a living God who existed prior to the world’s creation and who will continue to exist when the end of time arrives. God’s gift to those who are obedient and responsible to him is designated as “eternal life” or some such synonym. John’s Gospel provides th...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":11843,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Faith","title_en":"Faith","content_ro":"<h3>FAITH<\/h3>\n<p>Belief in that which has no tangible proof; trust in God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DefinitionofFaith\">Definition of Faith<\/p>\n<p>In the OT and NT, “faith” carries several meanings. It may mean simple trust in God or in the Word of God, and at other times faith almost becomes equivalent to active obedience. It may also find expression in the affirmation of a creedal statement. Thus, it also comes to mean the entire body of received Christian teaching or truth—“the truth.” In Colossians 2:7, the term suggests something to be accepted as a whole and embodied in personal life. In 2 Timothy 4:7, Paul witnesses to having “kept the faith.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FaithintheOldTestament\">Faith in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT also strongly emphasizes faith as confidence in God’s covenant or in the covenant God made with Abraham and his descendants. The call of Abraham and the promise that his descendants would be used in the history of redemption became the basis of the narratives of the OT, being seen as the working out of that covenant. Once the nation Israel was brought into being, God sustained and protected it. The exodus from Egypt is a prominent indication that God was at work restoring his people to the Promised Land. The obedience of the people of God as the proper expression of faith is seen clearly in the OT. Without seeing God, his people believed and obeyed him. Abraham left his native land to go into unknown territory. The people of Israel left Egypt following the leadership of God to a land they could not see. The promise of God gave them courage to possess the land promised to them. After the exodus, the covenant of Abraham was confirmed with the people of Israel by the sprinkling of blood (Ex 24:6-7). There was to be strict obedience to God’s commands as an expression of faith. This response of human faith to the Lord’s faithfulness was national and collective. There also were commands to, and instances of, personal faith.<\/p>\n<p>Not only the narrative and legal portions of the OT but also the poetic and prophetic writings emphasize faith. The Psalms abound in expressions of personal confidence in the Lord even in dark times. Habakkuk points out that “the righteous shall live by his faith” (Hb 2:4). From such instances it is clear that, as the Lord’s education of Israel proceeded, the matter of faith in God’s faithfulness became more and more a matter of individual and personal response, and it is in the Prophets that several ingredients—such as trust, obedience, fear, and certainty—blend into the understanding of such personal faith.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FaithintheNewTestament\">Faith in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>As over against the OT, where the accent is on the faithfulness of God, in the NT the emphasis is placed on the active, responding faith of the hearer to the promised, final revelation in the Messiah, Jesus. Both verb and noun regularly describe the adequate response of people to Jesus’ word and to the gospel.<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>The most striking feature of the synoptic Gospels (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>) is the use of faith without identifying its object: “If you have faith as a grain of mustard seed” (Mt 17:20); “When Jesus saw their faith” (Mk 2:5); “Your faith has saved you” (Lk 7:50). Jesus is portrayed as one who by his work and word opens the door to faith and makes faith possible. The question is not whether the faith is in Jesus or in the Father; the implication is undoubtedly both, but as with every true bearer of the Word of God, the eye of faith is turned to the One who sends.<\/p>\n<p>On more than one occasion, Jesus denies the request for a miracle to substantiate his words (Mt 12:38-39; 16:1-4). Faith is response to the Word alone without any supporting props. No sign is to be given but the sign of Jonah. In the story of the rich man and Lazarus (Lk 16:19-31), Jesus denies the request for the spectacular and insists that the hearer must respond to the word given to him (cf. Jn 20:29). The Word demands self-surrender and commitment. Hence, the very nature of the Word and of faith becomes an obstacle to the proud and the powerful.<\/p>\n<p>Faith is the medium by which the power of God is made visible. It moves mountains, heals the sick, and is the means of entrance into the kingdom. It may be mingled with doubt, as with the father who sought healing for his son (“I believe; help my unbelief!” [Mk 9:24]), or as with John the Baptist in prison, who, even with his doubts, was confirmed by Jesus as the greatest of the offspring of woman (Mt 11:2-15). Peter’s (and the other disciples’) perception was faulty, but Jesus affirms Peter’s confession as the foundation stone of the church. The synoptic Gospels portray the early faith of the disciples in all its limitations and weaknesses, yet it is still faith in that it is their positive response to Jesus’ word and work.<\/p>\n<h5>The Fourth Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>Faith is an especially significant concept in the Gospel of John (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>), though the word (in the Greek) occurs only as a verb. Quite often the reference has to do with the acceptance that something is true, that is, simple credence, or belief: “Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father in me” (Jn 14:11); “If you believed Moses, you would believe me” (Jn 5:46).<\/p>\n<p>Even more significant is the special expression “to believe into” in the sense of putting one’s trust into another. The particular form of the expression is without parallel before the fourth Gospel and may well express the strong sense of personal trust in the eternal Word made flesh. In John 3:16, whoever puts trust in him has eternal life. Those who put their trust in him are given power to become sons of God—to be born of God (Jn 1:12). They will never thirst (6:35); they will live, even though they die (11:25).<\/p>\n<p>In other places, John speaks of trust or faith in an absolute sense, that is, without referring to the one in whom trust is placed. In John 11:15 Jesus arrives after the death of Lazarus and is glad “in order that you might believe.” The outcome is going to be faith. Similarly, in the prologue (1:7), John the Baptist bears witness in order that through him all might believe. As Jesus satisfies the doubt of Thomas concerning the resurrection, he says, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe” (20:29). In these and other passages the fundamental outcome of Jesus’ witness to himself is trust.<\/p>\n<p>Faith and knowledge are closely related. In John 6:69 Peter says, “We have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God.” In his priestly prayer Jesus says that eternal life is to “know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent” (Jn 17:3). Also, God is seen through the eyes of faith. No one has ever seen God, but the Only Begotten has revealed him (1:18). He who has seen Jesus has seen the Father (14:9).<\/p>\n<p>To believe is also expressed in the verb “receive.” Those who receive Christ are given power to become the sons of God (Jn 1:12). Trust is that form of knowing or seeing by which the glory of God (1:14; 17:4) is made present.<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>In Paul’s letters (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>), he writes about faith from a number of angles. He sets faith over against “works of the law” as the only and true basis for righteousness (Rom 1–4; Gal 1–4) and appeals to Abraham to prove his point: “Abraham believed God and it was reckoned to him for righteousness” (Gn 15:6; cf. Rom 4:5; Gal 3:6). This is entirely apart from the law (Rom 3:21); righteousness is the gift of God through faith in Christ, specifically in his atoning work. Behind Paul’s conviction lies his awareness of the radical and pervasive sinfulness of humans that renders each one helpless. Humanity is dead in sin but is made alive by faith in the word and work of Jesus mediated through the gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Faith, then, is faith in Jesus Christ. The number of metaphors Paul employs to describe the consequences of faith is staggering. It is by faith that believers are justified (Rom 5:1), reconciled (2 Cor 5:18), redeemed (Eph 1:7), made alive (2:5), adopted into the family of God (Rom 8:15-16), re-created (2 Cor 5:17), transported into a new kingdom (Col 1:13), and set free (Gal 5:1). Faith is, for Paul, the <em>sine qua non<\/em> of every aspect of salvation, from the grace that convicts to the receiving of the full inheritance at the coming of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s letters, faith is bound up with love so that the great exponent of justification by faith becomes also the articulate exponent of distinctive Christian love. To say that faith is indispensable to salvation is only part of the truth, for faith expresses itself through love: “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is of any avail, but faith working through love” (Gal 5:6); “If I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing” (1 Cor 13:2). Love is both the genesis and the ultimate expression of faith. Hence, even for Paul there can be no <em>total<\/em> separation between faith and works. This love of which Paul speaks is the essential fruit of the Spirit through whom the life of faith is lived. Only by virtue of the indwelling Spirit does faith find expression in love.<\/p>\n<h5>General Epistles<\/h5>\n<p>James speaks of faith as being completed by works (Jas 2:22). He opposed that concept of faith that thinks primarily of creedal assent, of believing that something is true without acting upon it. James, like Paul, assumes the primacy of faith, but he is warning against those who would draw wrong conclusions. Faith apart from works is not faith; it is barren (v 20). The practical dimension of faith is the burden of much of this epistle.<\/p>\n<p>The writer of Hebrews recognizes that faith has always been characteristic of the people of God and their specially called leaders. Faith makes substantial what is otherwise nebulous and uncertain; it makes evidential what is not visible. By faith the people of God have a more certain ground for their lives and their actions than the world is able to discern (Heb 11:1). The great cloud of witnesses (12:1) bear testimony by their faith to the faithfulness of God.<\/p>\n<p>Faith is opened up by the Word of God, finds expression through the Holy Spirit who is given, and bears witness to the lordship of Jesus Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FAITH<\/h3>\n<p>Belief in that which has no tangible proof; trust in God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DefinitionofFaith\">Definition of Faith<\/p>\n<p>In the OT and NT, “faith” carries several meanings. It may mean simple trust in God or in the Word of God, and at other times faith almost becomes equivalent to active obedience. It may also find expression in the affirmation of a creedal statement. Thus, it also comes to mean the entire body of received Christian teaching or truth—“the truth.” In Colossians 2:7, the term suggests something to be accepted as a whole and embodied in personal life. In 2 Timothy 4:7, Paul witnesses to having “kept the faith.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FaithintheOldTestament\">Faith in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT also strongly emphasizes faith as confidence in God’s covenant or in the covenant God made with Abraham and his descendants. The call of Abraham and the promise that his descendants would be used in the history of redemption became the basis of the narratives of the OT, being seen as the working out of that covenant. Once the nation Israel was brought into being, God sustained and protected it. The exodus from Egypt is a prominent indication that God was at work restoring his people to the Promised Land. The obedience of the people of God as the proper expression of faith is seen clearly in the OT. Without seeing God, his people believed and obeyed him. Abraham left his native land to go into unknown territory. The people of Israel left Egypt following the leadership of God to a land they could not see. The promise of God gave them courage to possess the land promised to them. After the exodus, the covenant of Abraham was confirmed with the people of Israel by the sprinkling of blood (Ex 24:6-7). There was to be strict obedience to God’s commands as an expression of faith. This response of human faith to the Lord’s faithfulness was national and collective. There also were commands to, and instances of, personal faith.<\/p>\n<p>Not only the narrative and legal portions of the OT but also the poetic and prophetic writings emphasize faith. The Psalms abound in expressions of personal confidence in the Lord even in dark times. Habakkuk points out that “the righteous shall live by his faith” (Hb 2:4). From such instances it is clear that, as the Lord’s education of Israel proceeded, the matter of faith in God’s faithfulness became more and more a matter of individual and personal response, and it is in the Prophets that several ingredients—such as trust, obedience, fear, and certainty—blend into the understanding of such personal faith.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FaithintheNewTestament\">Faith in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>As over against the OT, where the accent is on the faithfulness of God, in the NT the emphasis is placed on the active, responding faith of the hearer to the promised, final revelation in the Messiah, Jesus. Both verb and noun regularly describe the adequate response of people to Jesus’ word and to the gospel.<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>The most striking feature of the synoptic Gospels (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>) is the use of faith without identifying its object: “If you have faith as a grain of mustard seed” (Mt 17:20); “When Jesus saw their faith” (Mk 2:5); “Your faith has saved you” (Lk 7:50). Jesus is portrayed as one who by his work and word opens the door to faith and makes faith possible. The question is not whether the faith is in Jesus or in the Father; the implication is undoubtedly both, but as with every true bearer of the Word of God, the eye of faith is turned to the One who sends.<\/p>\n<p>On more than one occasion, Jesus denies the request for a miracle to substantiate his words (Mt 12:38-39; 16:1-4). Faith is response to the Word alone without any supporting props. No sign is to be given but the sign of Jonah. In the story of the rich man and Lazarus (Lk 16:19-31), Jesus denies the request for the spectacular and insists that the hearer must respond to the word given to him (cf. Jn 20:29). The Word demands self-surrender and commitment. Hence, the very nature of the Word and of faith becomes an obstacle to the proud and the powerful.<\/p>\n<p>Faith is the medium by which the power of God is made visible. It moves mountains, heals the sick, and is the means of entrance into the kingdom. It may be mingled with doubt, as with the father who sought healing for his son (“I believe; help my unbelief!” [Mk 9:24]), or as with John the Baptist in prison, who, even with his doubts, was confirmed by Jesus as the greatest of the offspring of woman (Mt 11:2-15). Peter’s (and the other disciples’) perception was faulty, but Jesus affirms Peter’s confession as the foundation stone of the church. The synoptic Gospels portray the early faith of the disciples in all its limitations and weaknesses, yet it is still faith in that it is their positive response to Jesus’ word and work.<\/p>\n<h5>The Fourth Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>Faith is an especially significant concept in the Gospel of John (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>), though the word (in the Greek) occurs only as a verb. Quite often the reference has to do with the acceptance that something is true, that is, simple credence, or belief: “Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father in me” (Jn 14:11); “If you believed Moses, you would believe me” (Jn 5:46).<\/p>\n<p>Even more significant is the special expression “to believe into” in the sense of putting one’s trust into another. The particular form of the expression is without parallel before the fourth Gospel and may well express the strong sense of personal trust in the eternal Word made flesh. In John 3:16, whoever puts trust in him has eternal life. Those who put their trust in him are given power to become sons of God—to be born of God (Jn 1:12). They will never thirst (6:35); they will live, even though they die (11:25).<\/p>\n<p>In other places, John speaks of trust or faith in an absolute sense, that is, without referring to the one in whom trust is placed. In John 11:15 Jesus arrives after the death of Lazarus and is glad “in order that you might believe.” The outcome is going to be faith. Similarly, in the prologue (1:7), John the Baptist bears witness in order that through him all might believe. As Jesus satisfies the doubt of Thomas concerning the resurrection, he says, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe” (20:29). In these and other passages the fundamental outcome of Jesus’ witness to himself is trust.<\/p>\n<p>Faith and knowledge are closely related. In John 6:69 Peter says, “We have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God.” In his priestly prayer Jesus says that eternal life is to “know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent” (Jn 17:3). Also, God is seen through the eyes of faith. No one has ever seen God, but the Only Begotten has revealed him (1:18). He who has seen Jesus has seen the Father (14:9).<\/p>\n<p>To believe is also expressed in the verb “receive.” Those who receive Christ are given power to become the sons of God (Jn 1:12). Trust is that form of knowing or seeing by which the glory of God (1:14; 17:4) is made present.<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>In Paul’s letters (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>), he writes about faith from a number of angles. He sets faith over against “works of the law” as the only and true basis for righteousness (Rom 1–4; Gal 1–4) and appeals to Abraham to prove his point: “Abraham believed God and it was reckoned to him for righteousness” (Gn 15:6; cf. Rom 4:5; Gal 3:6). This is entirely apart from the law (Rom 3:21); righteousness is the gift of God through faith in Christ, specifically in his atoning work. Behind Paul’s conviction lies his awareness of the radical and pervasive sinfulness of humans that renders each one helpless. Humanity is dead in sin but is made alive by faith in the word and work of Jesus mediated through the gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Faith, then, is faith in Jesus Christ. The number of metaphors Paul employs to describe the consequences of faith is staggering. It is by faith that believers are justified (Rom 5:1), reconciled (2 Cor 5:18), redeemed (Eph 1:7), made alive (2:5), adopted into the family of God (Rom 8:15-16), re-created (2 Cor 5:17), transported into a new kingdom (Col 1:13), and set free (Gal 5:1). Faith is, for Paul, the <em>sine qua non<\/em> of every aspect of salvation, from the grace that convicts to the receiving of the full inheritance at the coming of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s letters, faith is bound up with love so that the great exponent of justification by faith becomes also the articulate exponent of distinctive Christian love. To say that faith is indispensable to salvation is only part of the truth, for faith expresses itself through love: “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is of any avail, but faith working through love” (Gal 5:6); “If I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing” (1 Cor 13:2). Love is both the genesis and the ultimate expression of faith. Hence, even for Paul there can be no <em>total<\/em> separation between faith and works. This love of which Paul speaks is the essential fruit of the Spirit through whom the life of faith is lived. Only by virtue of the indwelling Spirit does faith find expression in love.<\/p>\n<h5>General Epistles<\/h5>\n<p>James speaks of faith as being completed by works (Jas 2:22). He opposed that concept of faith that thinks primarily of creedal assent, of believing that something is true without acting upon it. James, like Paul, assumes the primacy of faith, but he is warning against those who would draw wrong conclusions. Faith apart from works is not faith; it is barren (v 20). The practical dimension of faith is the burden of much of this epistle.<\/p>\n<p>The writer of Hebrews recognizes that faith has always been characteristic of the people of God and their specially called leaders. Faith makes substantial what is otherwise nebulous and uncertain; it makes evidential what is not visible. By faith the people of God have a more certain ground for their lives and their actions than the world is able to discern (Heb 11:1). The great cloud of witnesses (12:1) bear testimony by their faith to the faithfulness of God.<\/p>\n<p>Faith is opened up by the Word of God, finds expression through the Holy Spirit who is given, and bears witness to the lordship of Jesus Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FAITH Belief in that which has no tangible proof; trust in God. Definition of Faith In the OT and NT, “faith” carries several meanings. It may mean simple trust in God or in the Word of God, and at other times faith almost becomes equivalent to active obedience. It may also find expression in the affirmation of a creedal statement. Thus, it also comes to mean the entire body of received Christian teaching or truth—“the truth.” In Colossians 2:7, the term suggests something to be accepted as a...","summary_en":"FAITH Belief in that which has no tangible proof; trust in God. Definition of Faith In the OT and NT, “faith” carries several meanings. It may mean simple trust in God or in the Word of God, and at other times faith almost becomes equivalent to active obedience. It may also find expression in the affirmation of a creedal statement. Thus, it also comes to mean the entire body of received Christian teaching or truth—“the truth.” In Colossians 2:7, the term suggests something to be accepted as a...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":17244,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Immanuel","title_en":"Immanuel","content_ro":"<h3>IMMANUEL<\/h3>\n<p>Hebrew masculine name that means “God with us.” It appears only twice in the OT (Is 7:14; 8:8) and once in the NT (Mt 1:23), where it is sometimes transliterated “Emmanuel.” In the OT the name was given to a child born in the time of Ahaz as a sign to the king that Judah would receive relief from attacks by Israel and Syria. The name symbolized the fact that God would demonstrate his presence with his people in this deliverance. The greater application is that this is a prophecy of the birth of the incarnate God, Jesus the Messiah, as shown in Matthew.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheProphecyinIsaiahsDay\">The Prophecy in Isaiah’s Day<\/p>\n<p>In focusing on the birth of Jesus as Immanuel, there has been some neglect of the historical fulfillment that occurred in the time of Ahaz. Ahaz was the son of a good king, Jotham and the grandson of another godly ruler, Uzziah, but his reign was marked by apostasy and idolatry. He made “molten images” for the Baals, offered incense in the Hinnom Valley, and even burned his sons as an offering (2 Chr 28:2-4). Because of this, the Lord gave him into the hand of Rezin, king of Syria, and of Pekah, king of Israel. The Edomites also invaded Judah, and the Philistines attacked the Shephelah and the Negev and took several cities (vv 17-18).<\/p>\n<p>Ahaz appealed to Tiglath-pileser III of Assyria (745–727 <span>BC<\/span>) for help against Israel and Syria. Tiglath-pileser accepted tribute from Ahaz, but attacked him instead of helping him (2 Chr 28:20-21). When he went to Damascus to meet the Assyrian king, Ahaz saw an altar, upon which he made offerings to the gods of Syria (v 23). He had a replica of this made and placed in the temple of Jerusalem (2 Kgs 16:10-12). The prophet Isaiah was directed to accost Ahaz at the end of the conduit of the upper pool. God’s message to the king was to “take heart,” for the attacking kings would fall (Is 7:7-9). Isaiah directed Ahaz to ask the Lord for a sign of this, but the king demurred, having a sudden attack of piety (v 12).<\/p>\n<p>Upon this refusal, the Lord gave to Ahaz a sign: a young woman would conceive and bear a son and call his name Immanuel (Is 7:14). That son would be able to distinguish good from evil by the time he was old enough to eat curds and wild honey, but even before that, the two kings would be removed and the king of Assyria would devastate their lands. The people would be taken away captive, so that the land would lie desolate and uncultivated. A man would have a cow to provide milk for curds, and wild honey would be gathered from the tangle of brush in the untended land.<\/p>\n<p>The identity of this woman and child in Isaiah’s time is uncertain. It has been proposed that the woman was Abijah, the wife of Ahaz, and that their son, Hezekiah, was this Immanuel. This is not demonstrable, and it seems inappropriate that a man like Ahaz should be the father of Immanuel.<\/p>\n<p>It has also been suggested that the wife of Isaiah was the mother of Immanuel. Isaiah 7:14 tells of the prospective birth of Immanuel; 8:3 tells of the conception and birth of Isaiah’s son, whose name, Maher-shalal-hash-baz (“swift to plunder and quick to spoil”) is related to the prediction of the fall of Judah’s enemies, for before the child would learn to talk, the lands of Syria and Israel would be taken by the king of Assyria (Is 8:4). Isaiah’s statement that he and his children were “signs and portents in Israel from the <span>Lord<\/span>” (v 18, <span>rsv<\/span>) enhances the view that it was his son who was also named Immanuel.<\/p>\n<p>The Lord then directed a message to Immanuel (Is 8:5-10). Because the people had refused the gracious invitation of the Lord, the Assyrians would scourge and fill the land of Immanuel. The plotting and plans of the people would come to nothing, for “God is with us” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘immanu’el<\/span><em>).<\/em> This is a play on words, using the name Immanuel to express the truth of the Lord’s presence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheProphecyFulfilledinJesus\">The Prophecy Fulfilled in Jesus<\/p>\n<p>In the fullness of time God sent forth his son; more than 700 years after Ahaz, Jesus was born and here all ambiguities fade away. His mother was a virgin from Nazareth named Mary (Miriam), betrothed to a solid citizen named Joseph. Matthew 1:23 cites Isaiah 7:14 as being fulfilled in the birth of Jesus. The Scripture is very explicit in stating that Mary had no sexual contact with her husband prior to the birth of Jesus (Mt 1:25). The same precision is seen in the Gospel of Luke. When the announcement of this child’s conception was made to Mary, she asked, “How can this be, since I have no husband?” (Lk 1:34, <span>rsv<\/span>). The angelic messenger explained that this conception would be brought about by the coming of the Holy Spirit upon her and by the overshadowing power of the Most High (v 35). For this reason the child would be not only Jesus and Immanuel but he would be called holy, the Son of God, God manifest in the flesh (Jn 1:18); the child would be unique, being both God and man.<\/p>\n<p>There were great distinctions between the Immanuel of Isaiah’s day and Immanuel the son of Mary. The first was a type; the other, the antitype. The first was the shadow; the other, the reality. The one symbolized deliverance from foreign oppression; the second was the Deliverer from the oppressor. The first represented God’s presence for but a few years; the second Immanuel is the son who lives forever.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of “God with us” was often reiterated by Jesus. He told his disciples that where two or three gathered in his name he would be present (Mt 18:20). Before his ascension, he assured them that he would be with them until the end of the age (28:20).<\/p>\n<p>He spoke also of the promise of the Holy Spirit, who “lives with you now and later will be in you” (Jn 14:17, <span>nlt<\/span>), who will abide with them forever (v 16). The “God with us” indwelling is spoken of in Colossians 1:27: “Christ lives in you.” In the consummation of all things, as shown to the apostle John, the Lord said: “Look, the home of God is now among his people! He will live with them, and they will be his people. God himself will be with them” (Rv 21:3, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Names of; Messiah.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>IMMANUEL<\/h3>\n<p>Hebrew masculine name that means “God with us.” It appears only twice in the OT (Is 7:14; 8:8) and once in the NT (Mt 1:23), where it is sometimes transliterated “Emmanuel.” In the OT the name was given to a child born in the time of Ahaz as a sign to the king that Judah would receive relief from attacks by Israel and Syria. The name symbolized the fact that God would demonstrate his presence with his people in this deliverance. The greater application is that this is a prophecy of the birth of the incarnate God, Jesus the Messiah, as shown in Matthew.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheProphecyinIsaiahsDay\">The Prophecy in Isaiah’s Day<\/p>\n<p>In focusing on the birth of Jesus as Immanuel, there has been some neglect of the historical fulfillment that occurred in the time of Ahaz. Ahaz was the son of a good king, Jotham and the grandson of another godly ruler, Uzziah, but his reign was marked by apostasy and idolatry. He made “molten images” for the Baals, offered incense in the Hinnom Valley, and even burned his sons as an offering (2 Chr 28:2-4). Because of this, the Lord gave him into the hand of Rezin, king of Syria, and of Pekah, king of Israel. The Edomites also invaded Judah, and the Philistines attacked the Shephelah and the Negev and took several cities (vv 17-18).<\/p>\n<p>Ahaz appealed to Tiglath-pileser III of Assyria (745–727 <span>BC<\/span>) for help against Israel and Syria. Tiglath-pileser accepted tribute from Ahaz, but attacked him instead of helping him (2 Chr 28:20-21). When he went to Damascus to meet the Assyrian king, Ahaz saw an altar, upon which he made offerings to the gods of Syria (v 23). He had a replica of this made and placed in the temple of Jerusalem (2 Kgs 16:10-12). The prophet Isaiah was directed to accost Ahaz at the end of the conduit of the upper pool. God’s message to the king was to “take heart,” for the attacking kings would fall (Is 7:7-9). Isaiah directed Ahaz to ask the Lord for a sign of this, but the king demurred, having a sudden attack of piety (v 12).<\/p>\n<p>Upon this refusal, the Lord gave to Ahaz a sign: a young woman would conceive and bear a son and call his name Immanuel (Is 7:14). That son would be able to distinguish good from evil by the time he was old enough to eat curds and wild honey, but even before that, the two kings would be removed and the king of Assyria would devastate their lands. The people would be taken away captive, so that the land would lie desolate and uncultivated. A man would have a cow to provide milk for curds, and wild honey would be gathered from the tangle of brush in the untended land.<\/p>\n<p>The identity of this woman and child in Isaiah’s time is uncertain. It has been proposed that the woman was Abijah, the wife of Ahaz, and that their son, Hezekiah, was this Immanuel. This is not demonstrable, and it seems inappropriate that a man like Ahaz should be the father of Immanuel.<\/p>\n<p>It has also been suggested that the wife of Isaiah was the mother of Immanuel. Isaiah 7:14 tells of the prospective birth of Immanuel; 8:3 tells of the conception and birth of Isaiah’s son, whose name, Maher-shalal-hash-baz (“swift to plunder and quick to spoil”) is related to the prediction of the fall of Judah’s enemies, for before the child would learn to talk, the lands of Syria and Israel would be taken by the king of Assyria (Is 8:4). Isaiah’s statement that he and his children were “signs and portents in Israel from the <span>Lord<\/span>” (v 18, <span>rsv<\/span>) enhances the view that it was his son who was also named Immanuel.<\/p>\n<p>The Lord then directed a message to Immanuel (Is 8:5-10). Because the people had refused the gracious invitation of the Lord, the Assyrians would scourge and fill the land of Immanuel. The plotting and plans of the people would come to nothing, for “God is with us” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘immanu’el<\/span><em>).<\/em> This is a play on words, using the name Immanuel to express the truth of the Lord’s presence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheProphecyFulfilledinJesus\">The Prophecy Fulfilled in Jesus<\/p>\n<p>In the fullness of time God sent forth his son; more than 700 years after Ahaz, Jesus was born and here all ambiguities fade away. His mother was a virgin from Nazareth named Mary (Miriam), betrothed to a solid citizen named Joseph. Matthew 1:23 cites Isaiah 7:14 as being fulfilled in the birth of Jesus. The Scripture is very explicit in stating that Mary had no sexual contact with her husband prior to the birth of Jesus (Mt 1:25). The same precision is seen in the Gospel of Luke. When the announcement of this child’s conception was made to Mary, she asked, “How can this be, since I have no husband?” (Lk 1:34, <span>rsv<\/span>). The angelic messenger explained that this conception would be brought about by the coming of the Holy Spirit upon her and by the overshadowing power of the Most High (v 35). For this reason the child would be not only Jesus and Immanuel but he would be called holy, the Son of God, God manifest in the flesh (Jn 1:18); the child would be unique, being both God and man.<\/p>\n<p>There were great distinctions between the Immanuel of Isaiah’s day and Immanuel the son of Mary. The first was a type; the other, the antitype. The first was the shadow; the other, the reality. The one symbolized deliverance from foreign oppression; the second was the Deliverer from the oppressor. The first represented God’s presence for but a few years; the second Immanuel is the son who lives forever.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of “God with us” was often reiterated by Jesus. He told his disciples that where two or three gathered in his name he would be present (Mt 18:20). Before his ascension, he assured them that he would be with them until the end of the age (28:20).<\/p>\n<p>He spoke also of the promise of the Holy Spirit, who “lives with you now and later will be in you” (Jn 14:17, <span>nlt<\/span>), who will abide with them forever (v 16). The “God with us” indwelling is spoken of in Colossians 1:27: “Christ lives in you.” In the consummation of all things, as shown to the apostle John, the Lord said: “Look, the home of God is now among his people! He will live with them, and they will be his people. God himself will be with them” (Rv 21:3, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Names of; Messiah.<\/p>","summary_ro":"IMMANUEL Hebrew masculine name that means “God with us.” It appears only twice in the OT (Is 7:14; 8:8) and once in the NT (Mt 1:23), where it is sometimes transliterated “Emmanuel.” In the OT the name was given to a child born in the time of Ahaz as a sign to the king that Judah would receive relief from attacks by Israel and Syria. The name symbolized the fact that God would demonstrate his presence with his people in this deliverance. The greater application is that this is a prophecy of t...","summary_en":"IMMANUEL Hebrew masculine name that means “God with us.” It appears only twice in the OT (Is 7:14; 8:8) and once in the NT (Mt 1:23), where it is sometimes transliterated “Emmanuel.” In the OT the name was given to a child born in the time of Ahaz as a sign to the king that Judah would receive relief from attacks by Israel and Syria. The name symbolized the fact that God would demonstrate his presence with his people in this deliverance. The greater application is that this is a prophecy of t...","source":"Articles\/I.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24953,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Mediator Mediate","title_en":"Mediator Mediate","content_ro":"<h3>MEDIATE, MEDIATOR<\/h3>\n<p>The act of an intermediary, go-between, or expert in divine things, not to negotiate agreement or compromise but to approach God on behalf of others, and so to convey desired knowledge and reassurance with divine authority.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Job voices longing for such a mediator (translated here from the LXX): “God is not a mortal like me, so I cannot argue with him or take him to trial. If only there were a mediator who could bring us together, but there is none. The mediator could make God stop beating me, and I would no longer live in terror of his punishment. Then I could speak to him without fear, but I cannot do that in my own strength” (Jb 9:32-35).<\/p>\n<p>More familiar is the mediation of instruction concerning the divine character and will. The Mosaic covenant was given through the mediation of angels and of Moses (Ex 20:18-21; Dt 33:2; Acts 7:53; Gal 3:19; contrast Heb 6:13-17, where God, acting alone, “mediated” an oath). The terms of the covenant law were expounded by prophets who “stood in God’s council,” and by priests who communicated God’s mind by oracle, sacred lot, and pronounced blessing (Dt 10:8; 33:8-10; 2 Chr 15:3; Jer 23:10-11, 18-22, 31-34; Mi 3:11; Mal 2:7).<\/p>\n<p>Most familiar is the liturgical mediation of the priest, whether by Moses (Ex 24:4-8) or by an appointed person trained in the rituals of worship (28:1). Because of Israel’s emphasis upon the holiness of God, sacrificial expiation, or “covering,” of sin figured largely in priestly mediation. The priest represented before God the people’s penitence, confession, and prayers for forgiveness, bearing the tribes’ names on shoulders and breastplate, and represented God, in turn, assuring his favor, forgiveness, and protection (see Heb 5:1-4; 7:27–10:11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>It was natural that the mission of Jesus should be described in mediatorial terms, and first as that of a prophet speaking for God to humans, making God known (Mk 6:15; 8:28). Where applied to Jesus, the actual title “mediator” refers mainly to his institution of a new covenant, establishing God’s new relationship with people (Heb 8:6; 9:15; 12:24). The one other instance is 1 Timothy 2:5, where the unity of God requires a sole, unrivaled mediator, namely, Christ.<\/p>\n<p>This last reference mentions Christ’s giving himself as “a ransom for all.” This essentially priestly function is the theme of Hebrews. Christ as Son of God, divinely appointed, sinless, suffering, tempted, sympathizing, and obedient, is uniquely qualified to be High Priest of his people. As priest, he offers a perfect sacrifice and lives forever to intercede for those who draw near to God through him. This mediatorial ministry places Jesus at “the right hand of God.” His intercession for people is mentioned also in Romans 8:34 and probably in 1 John 2:1, where ancient Greek commentators, <span>neb<\/span>, and other authoritative sources so understand “paraclete,” here applied to Jesus. His mediatorial sacrifice is mentioned in Matthew (Mt 26:28), John (Jn 1:29), Romans (Rom 3:25), and 1 John (1 Jn 1:7; 2:2; 4:10).<\/p>\n<p>Still more significant is the insistence, everywhere in the NT, that man’s knowledge of God, salvation, and hope come through Christ alone. Made poor for our sakes, he died and rose “for us”; our peace, access to God, reconciliation, expiation of sin, grace, truth, prayer, and “all spiritual blessings” are “through him,” “in him,” “through his blood,” and “in his name.” The purpose of God focuses in him; he mediated at Creation and at redemption (Col 1:15, 22); in him all the fullness of God dwells, and the face of Christ reveals God’s glory. No one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son reveals him; no one comes to the Father but by him; neither is there salvation in any other.<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s mediation is the fulfillment and end of all mediation between God and humankind. The book of Hebrews opens with the assertion that Christ surpasses all other mediators—angels, Moses, the Aaronic priesthood. His is a timeless priesthood, like Melchizedek’s. His sacrifice is unrepeatable, “once for all time,” and by it we have been consecrated to God “for all time.” The covenant he established between God and people offers better promises, sacrifice, sanctuary, and hope (Heb 7:19; 8:6; 9:1, 11-15). Christ’s mediation so far excels all others that it can never be superseded; he is priest without rival and forever (cf. 1 Tm 2:5).<\/p>\n<p>Without using the priestly analogy, John emphasizes the same truth. The gulf between divine and human has been crossed, decisively and finally, by the Incarnation. Instead of standing between God and man, Christ unites both within himself by becoming man. Mediating in the beginning at Creation, Christ is himself the Word, which from God’s side mediates God’s mind, embodies God’s message, and conveys God’s power. No one has seen God at any time, but as unique Son and divine, Jesus “expounds” God (Jn 1:18). From the human side, Jesus prays for the disciples (ch 17), offers perfect obedience, lays down his life for his flock, and offers the unblemished sacrifice that bears away the sin of the world.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Reconciliation.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MEDIATE, MEDIATOR<\/h3>\n<p>The act of an intermediary, go-between, or expert in divine things, not to negotiate agreement or compromise but to approach God on behalf of others, and so to convey desired knowledge and reassurance with divine authority.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Job voices longing for such a mediator (translated here from the LXX): “God is not a mortal like me, so I cannot argue with him or take him to trial. If only there were a mediator who could bring us together, but there is none. The mediator could make God stop beating me, and I would no longer live in terror of his punishment. Then I could speak to him without fear, but I cannot do that in my own strength” (Jb 9:32-35).<\/p>\n<p>More familiar is the mediation of instruction concerning the divine character and will. The Mosaic covenant was given through the mediation of angels and of Moses (Ex 20:18-21; Dt 33:2; Acts 7:53; Gal 3:19; contrast Heb 6:13-17, where God, acting alone, “mediated” an oath). The terms of the covenant law were expounded by prophets who “stood in God’s council,” and by priests who communicated God’s mind by oracle, sacred lot, and pronounced blessing (Dt 10:8; 33:8-10; 2 Chr 15:3; Jer 23:10-11, 18-22, 31-34; Mi 3:11; Mal 2:7).<\/p>\n<p>Most familiar is the liturgical mediation of the priest, whether by Moses (Ex 24:4-8) or by an appointed person trained in the rituals of worship (28:1). Because of Israel’s emphasis upon the holiness of God, sacrificial expiation, or “covering,” of sin figured largely in priestly mediation. The priest represented before God the people’s penitence, confession, and prayers for forgiveness, bearing the tribes’ names on shoulders and breastplate, and represented God, in turn, assuring his favor, forgiveness, and protection (see Heb 5:1-4; 7:27–10:11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>It was natural that the mission of Jesus should be described in mediatorial terms, and first as that of a prophet speaking for God to humans, making God known (Mk 6:15; 8:28). Where applied to Jesus, the actual title “mediator” refers mainly to his institution of a new covenant, establishing God’s new relationship with people (Heb 8:6; 9:15; 12:24). The one other instance is 1 Timothy 2:5, where the unity of God requires a sole, unrivaled mediator, namely, Christ.<\/p>\n<p>This last reference mentions Christ’s giving himself as “a ransom for all.” This essentially priestly function is the theme of Hebrews. Christ as Son of God, divinely appointed, sinless, suffering, tempted, sympathizing, and obedient, is uniquely qualified to be High Priest of his people. As priest, he offers a perfect sacrifice and lives forever to intercede for those who draw near to God through him. This mediatorial ministry places Jesus at “the right hand of God.” His intercession for people is mentioned also in Romans 8:34 and probably in 1 John 2:1, where ancient Greek commentators, <span>neb<\/span>, and other authoritative sources so understand “paraclete,” here applied to Jesus. His mediatorial sacrifice is mentioned in Matthew (Mt 26:28), John (Jn 1:29), Romans (Rom 3:25), and 1 John (1 Jn 1:7; 2:2; 4:10).<\/p>\n<p>Still more significant is the insistence, everywhere in the NT, that man’s knowledge of God, salvation, and hope come through Christ alone. Made poor for our sakes, he died and rose “for us”; our peace, access to God, reconciliation, expiation of sin, grace, truth, prayer, and “all spiritual blessings” are “through him,” “in him,” “through his blood,” and “in his name.” The purpose of God focuses in him; he mediated at Creation and at redemption (Col 1:15, 22); in him all the fullness of God dwells, and the face of Christ reveals God’s glory. No one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son reveals him; no one comes to the Father but by him; neither is there salvation in any other.<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s mediation is the fulfillment and end of all mediation between God and humankind. The book of Hebrews opens with the assertion that Christ surpasses all other mediators—angels, Moses, the Aaronic priesthood. His is a timeless priesthood, like Melchizedek’s. His sacrifice is unrepeatable, “once for all time,” and by it we have been consecrated to God “for all time.” The covenant he established between God and people offers better promises, sacrifice, sanctuary, and hope (Heb 7:19; 8:6; 9:1, 11-15). Christ’s mediation so far excels all others that it can never be superseded; he is priest without rival and forever (cf. 1 Tm 2:5).<\/p>\n<p>Without using the priestly analogy, John emphasizes the same truth. The gulf between divine and human has been crossed, decisively and finally, by the Incarnation. Instead of standing between God and man, Christ unites both within himself by becoming man. Mediating in the beginning at Creation, Christ is himself the Word, which from God’s side mediates God’s mind, embodies God’s message, and conveys God’s power. No one has seen God at any time, but as unique Son and divine, Jesus “expounds” God (Jn 1:18). From the human side, Jesus prays for the disciples (ch 17), offers perfect obedience, lays down his life for his flock, and offers the unblemished sacrifice that bears away the sin of the world.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Reconciliation.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MEDIATE, MEDIATOR The act of an intermediary, go-between, or expert in divine things, not to negotiate agreement or compromise but to approach God on behalf of others, and so to convey desired knowledge and reassurance with divine authority. In the Old Testament Job voices longing for such a mediator (translated here from the LXX): “God is not a mortal like me, so I cannot argue with him or take him to trial. If only there were a mediator who could bring us together, but there is none. The me...","summary_en":"MEDIATE, MEDIATOR The act of an intermediary, go-between, or expert in divine things, not to negotiate agreement or compromise but to approach God on behalf of others, and so to convey desired knowledge and reassurance with divine authority. In the Old Testament Job voices longing for such a mediator (translated here from the LXX): “God is not a mortal like me, so I cannot argue with him or take him to trial. If only there were a mediator who could bring us together, but there is none. The me...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":28479,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Begotten*, Only","title_en":"Begotten*, Only","content_ro":"<h3>ONLY BEGOTTEN*<\/h3>\n<p>Phrase deeply entrenched in Christian language as descriptive of Jesus. The word traditionally translated “only begotten” does not carry the idea of birth at all. Literally, it means “only one of its kind,” “unique.” This can be readily seen in the way it is used in the NT and in the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the OT).<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word for this phrase appears nine times in the NT, but only five of these occurrences, all from the Johannine writings, make reference to Jesus (Jn 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18; 1 Jn 4:9). Three of the other occurrences are of an only son or daughter (Lk 7:12; 8:42; 9:38; cf. Jgs 11:34 in the LXX). Because of its frequent use for an only child, the word often conveys the idea of something especially favored or precious. The remaining non-Johannine reference, in Hebrews 11:17, is to Isaac as Abraham’s “favored” or “unique” son. Isaac was not Abraham’s “only begotten,” since he had other children, but Isaac was his favored and unique son fulfilling God’s promise. In the Septuagint for Psalm 22:20 and 35:17, the psalmist, in his plea for deliverance, even uses this word of his own soul as that which is of great value. The Hebrew word that stands behind each of these OT texts also means “only” and does not carry any idea of birth.<\/p>\n<p>Where the word is used of Jesus, its meaning is likewise not “only begotten” but “only” or “unique.” The word is used with “son” and should be understood as God’s <em>only<\/em> Son, indicating both God’s favor toward him and his uniqueness (Jn 3:16, 18; 1 Jn 4:9). The statement at the baptism and transfiguration of Jesus in the Synoptics (“This is my beloved son”) expresses virtually the same idea. In fact, the word “beloved” is used in the Septuagint as an equivalent to the word “only” to translate the same Hebrew word. In John 1:14 the word “only” is used by itself to stress that the incarnate Word comes as a unique one from the Father. The final reference (Jn 1:18) is especially interesting because of the fact that some texts read “the only son” while others read “the only God.” Because scribes could easily have written “only son” due to their familiarity with the other texts in John and because of the superiority of the texts that read “only God,” this latter reading is preferred. The attitude expressed toward the incarnate Word is the highest possible. No one has ever seen God, but the unique (or only) God who is in the bosom of the Father has revealed him.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ONLY BEGOTTEN*<\/h3>\n<p>Phrase deeply entrenched in Christian language as descriptive of Jesus. The word traditionally translated “only begotten” does not carry the idea of birth at all. Literally, it means “only one of its kind,” “unique.” This can be readily seen in the way it is used in the NT and in the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the OT).<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word for this phrase appears nine times in the NT, but only five of these occurrences, all from the Johannine writings, make reference to Jesus (Jn 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18; 1 Jn 4:9). Three of the other occurrences are of an only son or daughter (Lk 7:12; 8:42; 9:38; cf. Jgs 11:34 in the LXX). Because of its frequent use for an only child, the word often conveys the idea of something especially favored or precious. The remaining non-Johannine reference, in Hebrews 11:17, is to Isaac as Abraham’s “favored” or “unique” son. Isaac was not Abraham’s “only begotten,” since he had other children, but Isaac was his favored and unique son fulfilling God’s promise. In the Septuagint for Psalm 22:20 and 35:17, the psalmist, in his plea for deliverance, even uses this word of his own soul as that which is of great value. The Hebrew word that stands behind each of these OT texts also means “only” and does not carry any idea of birth.<\/p>\n<p>Where the word is used of Jesus, its meaning is likewise not “only begotten” but “only” or “unique.” The word is used with “son” and should be understood as God’s <em>only<\/em> Son, indicating both God’s favor toward him and his uniqueness (Jn 3:16, 18; 1 Jn 4:9). The statement at the baptism and transfiguration of Jesus in the Synoptics (“This is my beloved son”) expresses virtually the same idea. In fact, the word “beloved” is used in the Septuagint as an equivalent to the word “only” to translate the same Hebrew word. In John 1:14 the word “only” is used by itself to stress that the incarnate Word comes as a unique one from the Father. The final reference (Jn 1:18) is especially interesting because of the fact that some texts read “the only son” while others read “the only God.” Because scribes could easily have written “only son” due to their familiarity with the other texts in John and because of the superiority of the texts that read “only God,” this latter reading is preferred. The attitude expressed toward the incarnate Word is the highest possible. No one has ever seen God, but the unique (or only) God who is in the bosom of the Father has revealed him.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ONLY BEGOTTEN* Phrase deeply entrenched in Christian language as descriptive of Jesus. The word traditionally translated “only begotten” does not carry the idea of birth at all. Literally, it means “only one of its kind,” “unique.” This can be readily seen in the way it is used in the NT and in the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the OT). The Greek word for this phrase appears nine times in the NT, but only five of these occurrences, all from the Johannine writings, make reference to Jes...","summary_en":"ONLY BEGOTTEN* Phrase deeply entrenched in Christian language as descriptive of Jesus. The word traditionally translated “only begotten” does not carry the idea of birth at all. Literally, it means “only one of its kind,” “unique.” This can be readily seen in the way it is used in the NT and in the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the OT). The Greek word for this phrase appears nine times in the NT, but only five of these occurrences, all from the Johannine writings, make reference to Jes...","source":"Articles\/O.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":35892,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Son of Man","title_en":"Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>SON OF MAN<\/h3>\n<p>Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory.<\/p>\n<p>The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. The book of Ezekiel is the general source, since this prophet was referred to as “son of man” 90 times. For example, God addressed him, “Son of man, stand upon your feet, and I will speak with you” (Ez 2:1, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus’ use of the term “Son of Man” and numerous themes from Ezekiel suggest his desire to identify himself as the eschatological prophet who, like Ezekiel (chs 4, 7, 10, 22, 40–48), had the last word about the destruction of Jerusalem and the restoration of the kingdom of God to Israel (Mt 23–24; Acts 1:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>The specific source of the term is Daniel 7:13-14, with its vision of one “like a son of man” who “comes with the clouds” into the presence of “the Ancient of Days,” who gives him the universal and eternal kingdom of God. Jesus repeatedly quoted parts of this text in teaching about his second coming (Mt 16:27; 19:28; 24:30; 25:31; 26:64). Clearly, Jesus understood this passage as a prophetic portrayal of his own person: his incarnation, ascension, and inheritance of the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the term “Son of Man” is used by Jesus about 80 times as a mysterious, indirect way of speaking about himself (Mt, 32 times; Mk, 14 times; Lk, 26 times; Jn, 10 times). In all these texts, Jesus was always the speaker, and no one ever addressed him as “Son of Man.” In some texts the reference is cryptic enough for some interpreters to insist that Jesus was speaking about another person. Such uncertainty is recorded in only one text in John, where the crowd asks Jesus, “Who is this ‘Son of Man’?” (Jn 12:34). In most texts, the identification is clear. In some it is explicit: “Who do men say that the Son of Man is?”—followed by, “Who do you say that I am?” (Mt 16:13, 15). The conclusion generally drawn is that Jesus used the term as a messianic title for himself, so that he could speak modestly about his person and mission yet convey the exalted content he wished to reveal about himself. He could do this with considerable originality because the term was not fraught with popular misconceptions concerning the Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>The term occurs only four other times in the NT. In Acts 7:56, Stephen says, “Look, I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing in the place of honor at God’s right hand!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Hebrews 2:6 quotes Psalm 8:4 as applying to Jesus. Finally, Revelation 1:13 and 14:14 record visions of someone “like a son of man,” who is undoubtedly the glorified Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels, the first theme in Jesus’ self-revelation connected with his use of the title “Son of Man” concerns his coming to earth to accomplish his messianic mission. A general comparison of Jesus’ present earthly condition with that of his previous heavenly glory is expressed in the saying “Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head” (Mt 8:20; see Lk 9:58). This saying indicates that the Son of Man gave up his heavenly home to suffer all the humiliations of his earthly ministry (Phil 2:5-11).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used the title to claim divine prerogatives, saying, “The Son of Man is Lord of the sabbath” (Mt 12:8; Mk 2:28; Lk 6:5). The Sabbath, a divine institution, may not be revised by ordinary men. But since Jesus is the Son of Man from heaven, he is free to rule as Lord even of the Sabbath, because he is the same Lord who instituted the Sabbath (Gn 2:2; Ex 20:8-11). After healing the paralytic at Capernaum, Jesus claimed that “the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins” (Mt 9:6; Mk 2:10; Lk 5:24). Previously, forgiveness of sins came from heaven and from God, but now forgiveness comes from Capernaum and is given by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The second aspect of Jesus’ use of the “Son of Man” title concerns his suffering, death, and glorious resurrection as the mysterious method he would use to fulfill his earthly mission as the Son of Man. Jesus began expounding this passion theme after Peter confessed him to be Messiah and Son of God (Mt 16:16). Jesus’ prediction of his passion as the Son of Man begins in Mark 8:31-32 and is repeated in several other texts. The Gospels expand the theme to include his suffering of mockery and scourging (Mt 17:12; 20:18; Mk 8:31; Lk 9:22), betrayal by Judas (Mt 17:22; 26:24-25; Mk 14:21, 41), rejection by the Jewish leaders (Mt 20:18), death by crucifixion (Mt 20:19; Mk 9:12, 31; 10:33), burial for three days (Mt 12:40; Lk 11:30), and resurrection (Mt 17:22-23; Mk 8:31).<\/p>\n<p>In the famous text “The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45), Jesus teaches that his death was a vicarious sacrifice for the salvation of his people. This idea of substitutionary atonement is a new element in the Son of Man material and derives from Jesus’ understanding of himself as the suffering Servant of the Lord (Is 53).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus also used the “Son of Man” title to teach about his second coming. As the Son of Man, Jesus will return to earth from heaven in the glory of his Father with the angels (Mt 16:27; Mk 8:38; Lk 9:26). First, he will be seated at the right hand of God, and then he will come again (Mt 26:64; Mk 14:62; Lk 22:69) with the clouds (Mt 24:30; Mk 13:26; Lk 21:27). This coming will be unexpected (Mt 24:27; Lk 12:40), like a flash of lightning or the flood of Noah (Mt 24:37; Lk 17:24). His coming will be for the gathering of the elect, the judgment of all the nations of the earth (Mt 19:28; 25:32), and the restoration of final righteousness in the world (19:28; 25:46).<\/p>\n<p>In these passages, Jesus’ focus shifts from the provisional victory in his passion and resurrection to the final victory of the Son of Man at his second coming. Here again, the dramatic emphasis is on the heavenly origin and divine prerogatives of the Son of Man. This man Jesus, the Son of Man, will be the final judge (cf. Acts 17:31).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John has its own distinctive material concerning the Son of Man. The angels are said to ascend and descend on the Son of Man (Jn 1:51), thereby signifying that he is a preexistent person who has come from heaven to earth (3:13; 6:62). His being lifted up (by crucifixion) will bring about eternal life for all who believe in him (3:14). The Son of Man (3:14) is also the Son of God (3:16), God’s one and only Son (1:18; 3:18). Quite simply, in John’s Gospel, the “Son of Man” title is equivalent to the title “Son of God.” It reveals his divinity, preexistence, heavenly origin, and divine prerogatives. It affirms his present earthly condition for revelation and passion, and his future eschatological glory. The Father has given the Son of Man authority to raise the dead and to judge the world (5:25-27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Teachings of; Messiah; Son of God.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SON OF MAN<\/h3>\n<p>Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory.<\/p>\n<p>The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. The book of Ezekiel is the general source, since this prophet was referred to as “son of man” 90 times. For example, God addressed him, “Son of man, stand upon your feet, and I will speak with you” (Ez 2:1, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus’ use of the term “Son of Man” and numerous themes from Ezekiel suggest his desire to identify himself as the eschatological prophet who, like Ezekiel (chs 4, 7, 10, 22, 40–48), had the last word about the destruction of Jerusalem and the restoration of the kingdom of God to Israel (Mt 23–24; Acts 1:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>The specific source of the term is Daniel 7:13-14, with its vision of one “like a son of man” who “comes with the clouds” into the presence of “the Ancient of Days,” who gives him the universal and eternal kingdom of God. Jesus repeatedly quoted parts of this text in teaching about his second coming (Mt 16:27; 19:28; 24:30; 25:31; 26:64). Clearly, Jesus understood this passage as a prophetic portrayal of his own person: his incarnation, ascension, and inheritance of the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the term “Son of Man” is used by Jesus about 80 times as a mysterious, indirect way of speaking about himself (Mt, 32 times; Mk, 14 times; Lk, 26 times; Jn, 10 times). In all these texts, Jesus was always the speaker, and no one ever addressed him as “Son of Man.” In some texts the reference is cryptic enough for some interpreters to insist that Jesus was speaking about another person. Such uncertainty is recorded in only one text in John, where the crowd asks Jesus, “Who is this ‘Son of Man’?” (Jn 12:34). In most texts, the identification is clear. In some it is explicit: “Who do men say that the Son of Man is?”—followed by, “Who do you say that I am?” (Mt 16:13, 15). The conclusion generally drawn is that Jesus used the term as a messianic title for himself, so that he could speak modestly about his person and mission yet convey the exalted content he wished to reveal about himself. He could do this with considerable originality because the term was not fraught with popular misconceptions concerning the Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>The term occurs only four other times in the NT. In Acts 7:56, Stephen says, “Look, I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing in the place of honor at God’s right hand!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Hebrews 2:6 quotes Psalm 8:4 as applying to Jesus. Finally, Revelation 1:13 and 14:14 record visions of someone “like a son of man,” who is undoubtedly the glorified Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels, the first theme in Jesus’ self-revelation connected with his use of the title “Son of Man” concerns his coming to earth to accomplish his messianic mission. A general comparison of Jesus’ present earthly condition with that of his previous heavenly glory is expressed in the saying “Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head” (Mt 8:20; see Lk 9:58). This saying indicates that the Son of Man gave up his heavenly home to suffer all the humiliations of his earthly ministry (Phil 2:5-11).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used the title to claim divine prerogatives, saying, “The Son of Man is Lord of the sabbath” (Mt 12:8; Mk 2:28; Lk 6:5). The Sabbath, a divine institution, may not be revised by ordinary men. But since Jesus is the Son of Man from heaven, he is free to rule as Lord even of the Sabbath, because he is the same Lord who instituted the Sabbath (Gn 2:2; Ex 20:8-11). After healing the paralytic at Capernaum, Jesus claimed that “the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins” (Mt 9:6; Mk 2:10; Lk 5:24). Previously, forgiveness of sins came from heaven and from God, but now forgiveness comes from Capernaum and is given by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The second aspect of Jesus’ use of the “Son of Man” title concerns his suffering, death, and glorious resurrection as the mysterious method he would use to fulfill his earthly mission as the Son of Man. Jesus began expounding this passion theme after Peter confessed him to be Messiah and Son of God (Mt 16:16). Jesus’ prediction of his passion as the Son of Man begins in Mark 8:31-32 and is repeated in several other texts. The Gospels expand the theme to include his suffering of mockery and scourging (Mt 17:12; 20:18; Mk 8:31; Lk 9:22), betrayal by Judas (Mt 17:22; 26:24-25; Mk 14:21, 41), rejection by the Jewish leaders (Mt 20:18), death by crucifixion (Mt 20:19; Mk 9:12, 31; 10:33), burial for three days (Mt 12:40; Lk 11:30), and resurrection (Mt 17:22-23; Mk 8:31).<\/p>\n<p>In the famous text “The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45), Jesus teaches that his death was a vicarious sacrifice for the salvation of his people. This idea of substitutionary atonement is a new element in the Son of Man material and derives from Jesus’ understanding of himself as the suffering Servant of the Lord (Is 53).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus also used the “Son of Man” title to teach about his second coming. As the Son of Man, Jesus will return to earth from heaven in the glory of his Father with the angels (Mt 16:27; Mk 8:38; Lk 9:26). First, he will be seated at the right hand of God, and then he will come again (Mt 26:64; Mk 14:62; Lk 22:69) with the clouds (Mt 24:30; Mk 13:26; Lk 21:27). This coming will be unexpected (Mt 24:27; Lk 12:40), like a flash of lightning or the flood of Noah (Mt 24:37; Lk 17:24). His coming will be for the gathering of the elect, the judgment of all the nations of the earth (Mt 19:28; 25:32), and the restoration of final righteousness in the world (19:28; 25:46).<\/p>\n<p>In these passages, Jesus’ focus shifts from the provisional victory in his passion and resurrection to the final victory of the Son of Man at his second coming. Here again, the dramatic emphasis is on the heavenly origin and divine prerogatives of the Son of Man. This man Jesus, the Son of Man, will be the final judge (cf. Acts 17:31).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John has its own distinctive material concerning the Son of Man. The angels are said to ascend and descend on the Son of Man (Jn 1:51), thereby signifying that he is a preexistent person who has come from heaven to earth (3:13; 6:62). His being lifted up (by crucifixion) will bring about eternal life for all who believe in him (3:14). The Son of Man (3:14) is also the Son of God (3:16), God’s one and only Son (1:18; 3:18). Quite simply, in John’s Gospel, the “Son of Man” title is equivalent to the title “Son of God.” It reveals his divinity, preexistence, heavenly origin, and divine prerogatives. It affirms his present earthly condition for revelation and passion, and his future eschatological glory. The Father has given the Son of Man authority to raise the dead and to judge the world (5:25-27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Teachings of; Messiah; Son of God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SON OF MAN Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory. The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. ...","summary_en":"SON OF MAN Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory. The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. ...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56319,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:18","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:18","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:18<\/strong> Moses was denied his desire to see God directly (Exod 33:18-20). Only Jesus has seen the Father, so he alone completely knows him and can tell us about him (John 3:32-35; 14:9-10). • <em>But the unique One, who is himself God:<\/em> The Son, who sees the Father, <em>is himself God—<\/em>not simply a messenger who knows something about God. John explicitly affirms Christ’s deity. Jesus shares the substance of God’s being.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:18<\/strong> Moses was denied his desire to see God directly (Exod 33:18-20). Only Jesus has seen the Father, so he alone completely knows him and can tell us about him (John 3:32-35; 14:9-10). • <em>But the unique One, who is himself God:<\/em> The Son, who sees the Father, <em>is himself God—<\/em>not simply a messenger who knows something about God. John explicitly affirms Christ’s deity. Jesus shares the substance of God’s being.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:18 Moses was denied his desire to see God directly (Exod 33:18-20). Only Jesus has seen the Father, so he alone completely knows him and can tell us about him (John 3:32-35; 14:9-10). • But the unique One, who is himself God: The Son, who sees the Father, is himself God—not simply a messenger who knows something about God. John explicitly affirms Christ’s deity. Jesus shares the substance of God’s being.","summary_en":"1:18 Moses was denied his desire to see God directly (Exod 33:18-20). Only Jesus has seen the Father, so he alone completely knows him and can tell us about him (John 3:32-35; 14:9-10). • But the unique One, who is himself God: The Son, who sees the Father, is himself God—not simply a messenger who knows something about God. John explicitly affirms Christ’s deity. Jesus shares the substance of God’s being.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83945,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:18","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:18","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:18<\/strong> Moses was denied his desire to see God directly (Exod 33:18-20). Only Jesus has seen the Father, so he alone completely knows him and can tell us about him (John 3:32-35; 14:9-10). • <em>But the unique One, who is himself God:<\/em> The Son, who sees the Father, <em>is himself God—<\/em>not simply a messenger who knows something about God. John explicitly affirms Christ’s deity. Jesus shares the substance of God’s being.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:18<\/strong> Moses was denied his desire to see God directly (Exod 33:18-20). Only Jesus has seen the Father, so he alone completely knows him and can tell us about him (John 3:32-35; 14:9-10). • <em>But the unique One, who is himself God:<\/em> The Son, who sees the Father, <em>is himself God—<\/em>not simply a messenger who knows something about God. John explicitly affirms Christ’s deity. Jesus shares the substance of God’s being.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:18 Moses was denied his desire to see God directly (Exod 33:18-20). Only Jesus has seen the Father, so he alone completely knows him and can tell us about him (John 3:32-35; 14:9-10). • But the unique One, who is himself God: The Son, who sees the Father, is himself God—not simply a messenger who knows something about God. John explicitly affirms Christ’s deity. Jesus shares the substance of God’s being.","summary_en":"1:18 Moses was denied his desire to see God directly (Exod 33:18-20). Only Jesus has seen the Father, so he alone completely knows him and can tell us about him (John 3:32-35; 14:9-10). • But the unique One, who is himself God: The Son, who sees the Father, is himself God—not simply a messenger who knows something about God. John explicitly affirms Christ’s deity. Jesus shares the substance of God’s being.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111571,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:18","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:18","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:18<\/strong> Moses was denied his desire to see God directly (Exod 33:18-20). Only Jesus has seen the Father, so he alone completely knows him and can tell us about him (John 3:32-35; 14:9-10). • <em>But the unique One, who is himself God:<\/em> The Son, who sees the Father, <em>is himself God—<\/em>not simply a messenger who knows something about God. John explicitly affirms Christ’s deity. Jesus shares the substance of God’s being.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:18<\/strong> Moses was denied his desire to see God directly (Exod 33:18-20). Only Jesus has seen the Father, so he alone completely knows him and can tell us about him (John 3:32-35; 14:9-10). • <em>But the unique One, who is himself God:<\/em> The Son, who sees the Father, <em>is himself God—<\/em>not simply a messenger who knows something about God. John explicitly affirms Christ’s deity. Jesus shares the substance of God’s being.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:18 Moses was denied his desire to see God directly (Exod 33:18-20). Only Jesus has seen the Father, so he alone completely knows him and can tell us about him (John 3:32-35; 14:9-10). • But the unique One, who is himself God: The Son, who sees the Father, is himself God—not simply a messenger who knows something about God. John explicitly affirms Christ’s deity. Jesus shares the substance of God’s being.","summary_en":"1:18 Moses was denied his desire to see God directly (Exod 33:18-20). Only Jesus has seen the Father, so he alone completely knows him and can tell us about him (John 3:32-35; 14:9-10). • But the unique One, who is himself God: The Son, who sees the Father, is himself God—not simply a messenger who knows something about God. John explicitly affirms Christ’s deity. Jesus shares the substance of God’s being.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139197,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:18","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:18","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:18<\/strong> Moses was denied his desire to see God directly (Exod 33:18-20). Only Jesus has seen the Father, so he alone completely knows him and can tell us about him (John 3:32-35; 14:9-10). • <em>But the unique One, who is himself God:<\/em> The Son, who sees the Father, <em>is himself God—<\/em>not simply a messenger who knows something about God. John explicitly affirms Christ’s deity. Jesus shares the substance of God’s being.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:18<\/strong> Moses was denied his desire to see God directly (Exod 33:18-20). Only Jesus has seen the Father, so he alone completely knows him and can tell us about him (John 3:32-35; 14:9-10). • <em>But the unique One, who is himself God:<\/em> The Son, who sees the Father, <em>is himself God—<\/em>not simply a messenger who knows something about God. John explicitly affirms Christ’s deity. Jesus shares the substance of God’s being.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:18 Moses was denied his desire to see God directly (Exod 33:18-20). Only Jesus has seen the Father, so he alone completely knows him and can tell us about him (John 3:32-35; 14:9-10). • But the unique One, who is himself God: The Son, who sees the Father, is himself God—not simply a messenger who knows something about God. John explicitly affirms Christ’s deity. Jesus shares the substance of God’s being.","summary_en":"1:18 Moses was denied his desire to see God directly (Exod 33:18-20). Only Jesus has seen the Father, so he alone completely knows him and can tell us about him (John 3:32-35; 14:9-10). • But the unique One, who is himself God: The Son, who sees the Father, is himself God—not simply a messenger who knows something about God. John explicitly affirms Christ’s deity. Jesus shares the substance of God’s being.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65440,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of God","title_en":"The Son of God","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\n<p>Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\n<p>Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","summary_en":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93066,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of God","title_en":"The Son of God","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\n<p>Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\n<p>Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","summary_en":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120692,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of God","title_en":"The Son of God","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\n<p>Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\n<p>Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","summary_en":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148318,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of God","title_en":"The Son of God","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\n<p>Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\n<p>Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","summary_en":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"19":[{"id":41582,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Elijah","title_en":"Elijah","content_ro":"<h3>Elijah<\/h3>\n<p>Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 <span>BC<\/span>). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a widow in Zarephath, a town in Jezebel’s home territory of Sidon. The widow’s son died, but Elijah prayed for him and he was revived (1 Kgs 17:8-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the third year of drought, Elijah challenged Baal’s prophets to a contest on Mount Carmel to demonstrate the identity of the true God (1 Kgs 18:1-40). The prophets of Baal called on Baal in vain, becoming frantic to induce him to appear, while Elijah made fun of Baal. When it was Elijah’s turn, he poured water over his sacrifice and prayed a simple, powerful prayer. Fire immediately consumed the offering. In response, the people of Israel worshiped the Lord and, at Elijah’s direction, killed Baal’s prophets. Then Elijah prayed for rain, and the drought ended (1 Kgs 18:41-46).<\/p>\n<p>Even with such tremendous displays of God’s power, Ahab and Jezebel continued to lead Israel astray. Jezebel was furious that her prophets had been killed (1 Kgs 19:1-2). She threatened Elijah, who fled to the desert and asked God to take his life. Instead, an angel nourished him until he reached Mount Sinai. Elijah complained that he was the only remaining prophet of the Lord and that his life was at risk. God encouraged him in a quiet voice, gave him good news, then recommissioned him for service (1 Kgs 19:3-18).<\/p>\n<p>Elijah was single-minded in his devotion to the true God. He had an assistant named Elisha whom he trained well. At the end of Elijah’s earthly existence, rather than dying, he was caught up into heaven in a chariot of fire (2 Kgs 2:11-12). Elisha inherited Elijah’s prophetic mantle and continued the task of confronting false worship in Israel (see 2 Kgs 2:1–9:13; 13:14-25).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament closes with the expectation that Elijah would return before the day of the Lord (Mal 4:5-6), an expectation that John the Baptist fulfilled, at least in part (see Matt 11:7-14; 17:10-13; Luke 1:17). Elijah appeared with Moses at Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-9). In Revelation 11:3-12, one of the two witnesses seems either to be Elijah himself or to be modeled after Elijah. Elijah’s life illustrates God’s kindness and the effectiveness of prayer (Luke 4:25-26; Rom 11:2-6; Jas 5:17-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 17:1–19:21; 21:1-29; 2 Kgs 1:1–2:25; 9:36; 10:10, 17; 2 Chr 21:12-15; Mal 4:5-6; Matt 11:14; 16:14; 17:1-13; 27:45-49; Mark 6:15; 8:28; 9:2-13; 15:33-36; Luke 1:17; 4:26; 9:28-36; John 1:19-28; Rom 11:1-6; Jas 5:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Elijah<\/h3>\n<p>Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 <span>BC<\/span>). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a widow in Zarephath, a town in Jezebel’s home territory of Sidon. The widow’s son died, but Elijah prayed for him and he was revived (1 Kgs 17:8-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the third year of drought, Elijah challenged Baal’s prophets to a contest on Mount Carmel to demonstrate the identity of the true God (1 Kgs 18:1-40). The prophets of Baal called on Baal in vain, becoming frantic to induce him to appear, while Elijah made fun of Baal. When it was Elijah’s turn, he poured water over his sacrifice and prayed a simple, powerful prayer. Fire immediately consumed the offering. In response, the people of Israel worshiped the Lord and, at Elijah’s direction, killed Baal’s prophets. Then Elijah prayed for rain, and the drought ended (1 Kgs 18:41-46).<\/p>\n<p>Even with such tremendous displays of God’s power, Ahab and Jezebel continued to lead Israel astray. Jezebel was furious that her prophets had been killed (1 Kgs 19:1-2). She threatened Elijah, who fled to the desert and asked God to take his life. Instead, an angel nourished him until he reached Mount Sinai. Elijah complained that he was the only remaining prophet of the Lord and that his life was at risk. God encouraged him in a quiet voice, gave him good news, then recommissioned him for service (1 Kgs 19:3-18).<\/p>\n<p>Elijah was single-minded in his devotion to the true God. He had an assistant named Elisha whom he trained well. At the end of Elijah’s earthly existence, rather than dying, he was caught up into heaven in a chariot of fire (2 Kgs 2:11-12). Elisha inherited Elijah’s prophetic mantle and continued the task of confronting false worship in Israel (see 2 Kgs 2:1–9:13; 13:14-25).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament closes with the expectation that Elijah would return before the day of the Lord (Mal 4:5-6), an expectation that John the Baptist fulfilled, at least in part (see Matt 11:7-14; 17:10-13; Luke 1:17). Elijah appeared with Moses at Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-9). In Revelation 11:3-12, one of the two witnesses seems either to be Elijah himself or to be modeled after Elijah. Elijah’s life illustrates God’s kindness and the effectiveness of prayer (Luke 4:25-26; Rom 11:2-6; Jas 5:17-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 17:1–19:21; 21:1-29; 2 Kgs 1:1–2:25; 9:36; 10:10, 17; 2 Chr 21:12-15; Mal 4:5-6; Matt 11:14; 16:14; 17:1-13; 27:45-49; Mark 6:15; 8:28; 9:2-13; 15:33-36; Luke 1:17; 4:26; 9:28-36; John 1:19-28; Rom 11:1-6; Jas 5:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Elijah Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 BC). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord. Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a...","summary_en":"Elijah Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 BC). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord. Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":42455,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Jewish Leaders","title_en":"Jewish Leaders","content_ro":"<h3>Jewish Leaders<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him.<\/p>\n<p>When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Acts 14:19; 1 Thes 2:14; cp. Gal 1:13-14). The Greek term translated “Jewish leaders” could be literally translated as “Jews.” But the word took on this technical meaning to refer to the Temple leadership who confronted Jesus, judged him, and orchestrated his crucifixion (see John 1:19; 2:18; 5:9-18; 9:18-22). This is important because the New Testament—particularly John’s Gospel—has often been seen as anti-Semitic. But the truth is that Jesus, who was himself a Jew, did not wrestle with “Jews” in general. His antagonists were the “Jewish leaders”—the brokers of religious power in first-century Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 1:19-24; 2:18-20; 5:9-18; 7:1, 10-13, 35-36; 9:13-34; 11:45-54; 12:41-43; 18:28-36; 19:6-8, 12-16, 31, 38; 20:19; Acts 6:10-12; 7:54-58; 12:11; 21:11; 25:1-3, 7; 26:1-11; 28:17-24; 2 Corinthians 11:24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jewish Leaders<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him.<\/p>\n<p>When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Acts 14:19; 1 Thes 2:14; cp. Gal 1:13-14). The Greek term translated “Jewish leaders” could be literally translated as “Jews.” But the word took on this technical meaning to refer to the Temple leadership who confronted Jesus, judged him, and orchestrated his crucifixion (see John 1:19; 2:18; 5:9-18; 9:18-22). This is important because the New Testament—particularly John’s Gospel—has often been seen as anti-Semitic. But the truth is that Jesus, who was himself a Jew, did not wrestle with “Jews” in general. His antagonists were the “Jewish leaders”—the brokers of religious power in first-century Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 1:19-24; 2:18-20; 5:9-18; 7:1, 10-13, 35-36; 9:13-34; 11:45-54; 12:41-43; 18:28-36; 19:6-8, 12-16, 31, 38; 20:19; Acts 6:10-12; 7:54-58; 12:11; 21:11; 25:1-3, 7; 26:1-11; 28:17-24; 2 Corinthians 11:24<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jewish Leaders Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him. When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Ac...","summary_en":"Jewish Leaders Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him. When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Ac...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69208,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Elijah","title_en":"Elijah","content_ro":"<h3>Elijah<\/h3>\n<p>Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 <span>BC<\/span>). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a widow in Zarephath, a town in Jezebel’s home territory of Sidon. The widow’s son died, but Elijah prayed for him and he was revived (1 Kgs 17:8-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the third year of drought, Elijah challenged Baal’s prophets to a contest on Mount Carmel to demonstrate the identity of the true God (1 Kgs 18:1-40). The prophets of Baal called on Baal in vain, becoming frantic to induce him to appear, while Elijah made fun of Baal. When it was Elijah’s turn, he poured water over his sacrifice and prayed a simple, powerful prayer. Fire immediately consumed the offering. In response, the people of Israel worshiped the Lord and, at Elijah’s direction, killed Baal’s prophets. Then Elijah prayed for rain, and the drought ended (1 Kgs 18:41-46).<\/p>\n<p>Even with such tremendous displays of God’s power, Ahab and Jezebel continued to lead Israel astray. Jezebel was furious that her prophets had been killed (1 Kgs 19:1-2). She threatened Elijah, who fled to the desert and asked God to take his life. Instead, an angel nourished him until he reached Mount Sinai. Elijah complained that he was the only remaining prophet of the Lord and that his life was at risk. God encouraged him in a quiet voice, gave him good news, then recommissioned him for service (1 Kgs 19:3-18).<\/p>\n<p>Elijah was single-minded in his devotion to the true God. He had an assistant named Elisha whom he trained well. At the end of Elijah’s earthly existence, rather than dying, he was caught up into heaven in a chariot of fire (2 Kgs 2:11-12). Elisha inherited Elijah’s prophetic mantle and continued the task of confronting false worship in Israel (see 2 Kgs 2:1–9:13; 13:14-25).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament closes with the expectation that Elijah would return before the day of the Lord (Mal 4:5-6), an expectation that John the Baptist fulfilled, at least in part (see Matt 11:7-14; 17:10-13; Luke 1:17). Elijah appeared with Moses at Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-9). In Revelation 11:3-12, one of the two witnesses seems either to be Elijah himself or to be modeled after Elijah. Elijah’s life illustrates God’s kindness and the effectiveness of prayer (Luke 4:25-26; Rom 11:2-6; Jas 5:17-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 17:1–19:21; 21:1-29; 2 Kgs 1:1–2:25; 9:36; 10:10, 17; 2 Chr 21:12-15; Mal 4:5-6; Matt 11:14; 16:14; 17:1-13; 27:45-49; Mark 6:15; 8:28; 9:2-13; 15:33-36; Luke 1:17; 4:26; 9:28-36; John 1:19-28; Rom 11:1-6; Jas 5:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Elijah<\/h3>\n<p>Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 <span>BC<\/span>). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a widow in Zarephath, a town in Jezebel’s home territory of Sidon. The widow’s son died, but Elijah prayed for him and he was revived (1 Kgs 17:8-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the third year of drought, Elijah challenged Baal’s prophets to a contest on Mount Carmel to demonstrate the identity of the true God (1 Kgs 18:1-40). The prophets of Baal called on Baal in vain, becoming frantic to induce him to appear, while Elijah made fun of Baal. When it was Elijah’s turn, he poured water over his sacrifice and prayed a simple, powerful prayer. Fire immediately consumed the offering. In response, the people of Israel worshiped the Lord and, at Elijah’s direction, killed Baal’s prophets. Then Elijah prayed for rain, and the drought ended (1 Kgs 18:41-46).<\/p>\n<p>Even with such tremendous displays of God’s power, Ahab and Jezebel continued to lead Israel astray. Jezebel was furious that her prophets had been killed (1 Kgs 19:1-2). She threatened Elijah, who fled to the desert and asked God to take his life. Instead, an angel nourished him until he reached Mount Sinai. Elijah complained that he was the only remaining prophet of the Lord and that his life was at risk. God encouraged him in a quiet voice, gave him good news, then recommissioned him for service (1 Kgs 19:3-18).<\/p>\n<p>Elijah was single-minded in his devotion to the true God. He had an assistant named Elisha whom he trained well. At the end of Elijah’s earthly existence, rather than dying, he was caught up into heaven in a chariot of fire (2 Kgs 2:11-12). Elisha inherited Elijah’s prophetic mantle and continued the task of confronting false worship in Israel (see 2 Kgs 2:1–9:13; 13:14-25).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament closes with the expectation that Elijah would return before the day of the Lord (Mal 4:5-6), an expectation that John the Baptist fulfilled, at least in part (see Matt 11:7-14; 17:10-13; Luke 1:17). Elijah appeared with Moses at Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-9). In Revelation 11:3-12, one of the two witnesses seems either to be Elijah himself or to be modeled after Elijah. Elijah’s life illustrates God’s kindness and the effectiveness of prayer (Luke 4:25-26; Rom 11:2-6; Jas 5:17-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 17:1–19:21; 21:1-29; 2 Kgs 1:1–2:25; 9:36; 10:10, 17; 2 Chr 21:12-15; Mal 4:5-6; Matt 11:14; 16:14; 17:1-13; 27:45-49; Mark 6:15; 8:28; 9:2-13; 15:33-36; Luke 1:17; 4:26; 9:28-36; John 1:19-28; Rom 11:1-6; Jas 5:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Elijah Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 BC). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord. Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a...","summary_en":"Elijah Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 BC). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord. Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":70081,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Jewish Leaders","title_en":"Jewish Leaders","content_ro":"<h3>Jewish Leaders<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him.<\/p>\n<p>When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Acts 14:19; 1 Thes 2:14; cp. Gal 1:13-14). The Greek term translated “Jewish leaders” could be literally translated as “Jews.” But the word took on this technical meaning to refer to the Temple leadership who confronted Jesus, judged him, and orchestrated his crucifixion (see John 1:19; 2:18; 5:9-18; 9:18-22). This is important because the New Testament—particularly John’s Gospel—has often been seen as anti-Semitic. But the truth is that Jesus, who was himself a Jew, did not wrestle with “Jews” in general. His antagonists were the “Jewish leaders”—the brokers of religious power in first-century Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 1:19-24; 2:18-20; 5:9-18; 7:1, 10-13, 35-36; 9:13-34; 11:45-54; 12:41-43; 18:28-36; 19:6-8, 12-16, 31, 38; 20:19; Acts 6:10-12; 7:54-58; 12:11; 21:11; 25:1-3, 7; 26:1-11; 28:17-24; 2 Corinthians 11:24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jewish Leaders<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him.<\/p>\n<p>When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Acts 14:19; 1 Thes 2:14; cp. Gal 1:13-14). The Greek term translated “Jewish leaders” could be literally translated as “Jews.” But the word took on this technical meaning to refer to the Temple leadership who confronted Jesus, judged him, and orchestrated his crucifixion (see John 1:19; 2:18; 5:9-18; 9:18-22). This is important because the New Testament—particularly John’s Gospel—has often been seen as anti-Semitic. But the truth is that Jesus, who was himself a Jew, did not wrestle with “Jews” in general. His antagonists were the “Jewish leaders”—the brokers of religious power in first-century Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 1:19-24; 2:18-20; 5:9-18; 7:1, 10-13, 35-36; 9:13-34; 11:45-54; 12:41-43; 18:28-36; 19:6-8, 12-16, 31, 38; 20:19; Acts 6:10-12; 7:54-58; 12:11; 21:11; 25:1-3, 7; 26:1-11; 28:17-24; 2 Corinthians 11:24<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jewish Leaders Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him. When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Ac...","summary_en":"Jewish Leaders Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him. When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Ac...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":96834,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Elijah","title_en":"Elijah","content_ro":"<h3>Elijah<\/h3>\n<p>Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 <span>BC<\/span>). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a widow in Zarephath, a town in Jezebel’s home territory of Sidon. The widow’s son died, but Elijah prayed for him and he was revived (1 Kgs 17:8-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the third year of drought, Elijah challenged Baal’s prophets to a contest on Mount Carmel to demonstrate the identity of the true God (1 Kgs 18:1-40). The prophets of Baal called on Baal in vain, becoming frantic to induce him to appear, while Elijah made fun of Baal. When it was Elijah’s turn, he poured water over his sacrifice and prayed a simple, powerful prayer. Fire immediately consumed the offering. In response, the people of Israel worshiped the Lord and, at Elijah’s direction, killed Baal’s prophets. Then Elijah prayed for rain, and the drought ended (1 Kgs 18:41-46).<\/p>\n<p>Even with such tremendous displays of God’s power, Ahab and Jezebel continued to lead Israel astray. Jezebel was furious that her prophets had been killed (1 Kgs 19:1-2). She threatened Elijah, who fled to the desert and asked God to take his life. Instead, an angel nourished him until he reached Mount Sinai. Elijah complained that he was the only remaining prophet of the Lord and that his life was at risk. God encouraged him in a quiet voice, gave him good news, then recommissioned him for service (1 Kgs 19:3-18).<\/p>\n<p>Elijah was single-minded in his devotion to the true God. He had an assistant named Elisha whom he trained well. At the end of Elijah’s earthly existence, rather than dying, he was caught up into heaven in a chariot of fire (2 Kgs 2:11-12). Elisha inherited Elijah’s prophetic mantle and continued the task of confronting false worship in Israel (see 2 Kgs 2:1–9:13; 13:14-25).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament closes with the expectation that Elijah would return before the day of the Lord (Mal 4:5-6), an expectation that John the Baptist fulfilled, at least in part (see Matt 11:7-14; 17:10-13; Luke 1:17). Elijah appeared with Moses at Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-9). In Revelation 11:3-12, one of the two witnesses seems either to be Elijah himself or to be modeled after Elijah. Elijah’s life illustrates God’s kindness and the effectiveness of prayer (Luke 4:25-26; Rom 11:2-6; Jas 5:17-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 17:1–19:21; 21:1-29; 2 Kgs 1:1–2:25; 9:36; 10:10, 17; 2 Chr 21:12-15; Mal 4:5-6; Matt 11:14; 16:14; 17:1-13; 27:45-49; Mark 6:15; 8:28; 9:2-13; 15:33-36; Luke 1:17; 4:26; 9:28-36; John 1:19-28; Rom 11:1-6; Jas 5:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Elijah<\/h3>\n<p>Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 <span>BC<\/span>). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a widow in Zarephath, a town in Jezebel’s home territory of Sidon. The widow’s son died, but Elijah prayed for him and he was revived (1 Kgs 17:8-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the third year of drought, Elijah challenged Baal’s prophets to a contest on Mount Carmel to demonstrate the identity of the true God (1 Kgs 18:1-40). The prophets of Baal called on Baal in vain, becoming frantic to induce him to appear, while Elijah made fun of Baal. When it was Elijah’s turn, he poured water over his sacrifice and prayed a simple, powerful prayer. Fire immediately consumed the offering. In response, the people of Israel worshiped the Lord and, at Elijah’s direction, killed Baal’s prophets. Then Elijah prayed for rain, and the drought ended (1 Kgs 18:41-46).<\/p>\n<p>Even with such tremendous displays of God’s power, Ahab and Jezebel continued to lead Israel astray. Jezebel was furious that her prophets had been killed (1 Kgs 19:1-2). She threatened Elijah, who fled to the desert and asked God to take his life. Instead, an angel nourished him until he reached Mount Sinai. Elijah complained that he was the only remaining prophet of the Lord and that his life was at risk. God encouraged him in a quiet voice, gave him good news, then recommissioned him for service (1 Kgs 19:3-18).<\/p>\n<p>Elijah was single-minded in his devotion to the true God. He had an assistant named Elisha whom he trained well. At the end of Elijah’s earthly existence, rather than dying, he was caught up into heaven in a chariot of fire (2 Kgs 2:11-12). Elisha inherited Elijah’s prophetic mantle and continued the task of confronting false worship in Israel (see 2 Kgs 2:1–9:13; 13:14-25).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament closes with the expectation that Elijah would return before the day of the Lord (Mal 4:5-6), an expectation that John the Baptist fulfilled, at least in part (see Matt 11:7-14; 17:10-13; Luke 1:17). Elijah appeared with Moses at Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-9). In Revelation 11:3-12, one of the two witnesses seems either to be Elijah himself or to be modeled after Elijah. Elijah’s life illustrates God’s kindness and the effectiveness of prayer (Luke 4:25-26; Rom 11:2-6; Jas 5:17-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 17:1–19:21; 21:1-29; 2 Kgs 1:1–2:25; 9:36; 10:10, 17; 2 Chr 21:12-15; Mal 4:5-6; Matt 11:14; 16:14; 17:1-13; 27:45-49; Mark 6:15; 8:28; 9:2-13; 15:33-36; Luke 1:17; 4:26; 9:28-36; John 1:19-28; Rom 11:1-6; Jas 5:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Elijah Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 BC). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord. Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a...","summary_en":"Elijah Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 BC). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord. Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97707,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Jewish Leaders","title_en":"Jewish Leaders","content_ro":"<h3>Jewish Leaders<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him.<\/p>\n<p>When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Acts 14:19; 1 Thes 2:14; cp. Gal 1:13-14). The Greek term translated “Jewish leaders” could be literally translated as “Jews.” But the word took on this technical meaning to refer to the Temple leadership who confronted Jesus, judged him, and orchestrated his crucifixion (see John 1:19; 2:18; 5:9-18; 9:18-22). This is important because the New Testament—particularly John’s Gospel—has often been seen as anti-Semitic. But the truth is that Jesus, who was himself a Jew, did not wrestle with “Jews” in general. His antagonists were the “Jewish leaders”—the brokers of religious power in first-century Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 1:19-24; 2:18-20; 5:9-18; 7:1, 10-13, 35-36; 9:13-34; 11:45-54; 12:41-43; 18:28-36; 19:6-8, 12-16, 31, 38; 20:19; Acts 6:10-12; 7:54-58; 12:11; 21:11; 25:1-3, 7; 26:1-11; 28:17-24; 2 Corinthians 11:24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jewish Leaders<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him.<\/p>\n<p>When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Acts 14:19; 1 Thes 2:14; cp. Gal 1:13-14). The Greek term translated “Jewish leaders” could be literally translated as “Jews.” But the word took on this technical meaning to refer to the Temple leadership who confronted Jesus, judged him, and orchestrated his crucifixion (see John 1:19; 2:18; 5:9-18; 9:18-22). This is important because the New Testament—particularly John’s Gospel—has often been seen as anti-Semitic. But the truth is that Jesus, who was himself a Jew, did not wrestle with “Jews” in general. His antagonists were the “Jewish leaders”—the brokers of religious power in first-century Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 1:19-24; 2:18-20; 5:9-18; 7:1, 10-13, 35-36; 9:13-34; 11:45-54; 12:41-43; 18:28-36; 19:6-8, 12-16, 31, 38; 20:19; Acts 6:10-12; 7:54-58; 12:11; 21:11; 25:1-3, 7; 26:1-11; 28:17-24; 2 Corinthians 11:24<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jewish Leaders Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him. When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Ac...","summary_en":"Jewish Leaders Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him. When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Ac...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":124460,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Elijah","title_en":"Elijah","content_ro":"<h3>Elijah<\/h3>\n<p>Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 <span>BC<\/span>). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a widow in Zarephath, a town in Jezebel’s home territory of Sidon. The widow’s son died, but Elijah prayed for him and he was revived (1 Kgs 17:8-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the third year of drought, Elijah challenged Baal’s prophets to a contest on Mount Carmel to demonstrate the identity of the true God (1 Kgs 18:1-40). The prophets of Baal called on Baal in vain, becoming frantic to induce him to appear, while Elijah made fun of Baal. When it was Elijah’s turn, he poured water over his sacrifice and prayed a simple, powerful prayer. Fire immediately consumed the offering. In response, the people of Israel worshiped the Lord and, at Elijah’s direction, killed Baal’s prophets. Then Elijah prayed for rain, and the drought ended (1 Kgs 18:41-46).<\/p>\n<p>Even with such tremendous displays of God’s power, Ahab and Jezebel continued to lead Israel astray. Jezebel was furious that her prophets had been killed (1 Kgs 19:1-2). She threatened Elijah, who fled to the desert and asked God to take his life. Instead, an angel nourished him until he reached Mount Sinai. Elijah complained that he was the only remaining prophet of the Lord and that his life was at risk. God encouraged him in a quiet voice, gave him good news, then recommissioned him for service (1 Kgs 19:3-18).<\/p>\n<p>Elijah was single-minded in his devotion to the true God. He had an assistant named Elisha whom he trained well. At the end of Elijah’s earthly existence, rather than dying, he was caught up into heaven in a chariot of fire (2 Kgs 2:11-12). Elisha inherited Elijah’s prophetic mantle and continued the task of confronting false worship in Israel (see 2 Kgs 2:1–9:13; 13:14-25).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament closes with the expectation that Elijah would return before the day of the Lord (Mal 4:5-6), an expectation that John the Baptist fulfilled, at least in part (see Matt 11:7-14; 17:10-13; Luke 1:17). Elijah appeared with Moses at Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-9). In Revelation 11:3-12, one of the two witnesses seems either to be Elijah himself or to be modeled after Elijah. Elijah’s life illustrates God’s kindness and the effectiveness of prayer (Luke 4:25-26; Rom 11:2-6; Jas 5:17-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 17:1–19:21; 21:1-29; 2 Kgs 1:1–2:25; 9:36; 10:10, 17; 2 Chr 21:12-15; Mal 4:5-6; Matt 11:14; 16:14; 17:1-13; 27:45-49; Mark 6:15; 8:28; 9:2-13; 15:33-36; Luke 1:17; 4:26; 9:28-36; John 1:19-28; Rom 11:1-6; Jas 5:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Elijah<\/h3>\n<p>Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 <span>BC<\/span>). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a widow in Zarephath, a town in Jezebel’s home territory of Sidon. The widow’s son died, but Elijah prayed for him and he was revived (1 Kgs 17:8-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the third year of drought, Elijah challenged Baal’s prophets to a contest on Mount Carmel to demonstrate the identity of the true God (1 Kgs 18:1-40). The prophets of Baal called on Baal in vain, becoming frantic to induce him to appear, while Elijah made fun of Baal. When it was Elijah’s turn, he poured water over his sacrifice and prayed a simple, powerful prayer. Fire immediately consumed the offering. In response, the people of Israel worshiped the Lord and, at Elijah’s direction, killed Baal’s prophets. Then Elijah prayed for rain, and the drought ended (1 Kgs 18:41-46).<\/p>\n<p>Even with such tremendous displays of God’s power, Ahab and Jezebel continued to lead Israel astray. Jezebel was furious that her prophets had been killed (1 Kgs 19:1-2). She threatened Elijah, who fled to the desert and asked God to take his life. Instead, an angel nourished him until he reached Mount Sinai. Elijah complained that he was the only remaining prophet of the Lord and that his life was at risk. God encouraged him in a quiet voice, gave him good news, then recommissioned him for service (1 Kgs 19:3-18).<\/p>\n<p>Elijah was single-minded in his devotion to the true God. He had an assistant named Elisha whom he trained well. At the end of Elijah’s earthly existence, rather than dying, he was caught up into heaven in a chariot of fire (2 Kgs 2:11-12). Elisha inherited Elijah’s prophetic mantle and continued the task of confronting false worship in Israel (see 2 Kgs 2:1–9:13; 13:14-25).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament closes with the expectation that Elijah would return before the day of the Lord (Mal 4:5-6), an expectation that John the Baptist fulfilled, at least in part (see Matt 11:7-14; 17:10-13; Luke 1:17). Elijah appeared with Moses at Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-9). In Revelation 11:3-12, one of the two witnesses seems either to be Elijah himself or to be modeled after Elijah. Elijah’s life illustrates God’s kindness and the effectiveness of prayer (Luke 4:25-26; Rom 11:2-6; Jas 5:17-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 17:1–19:21; 21:1-29; 2 Kgs 1:1–2:25; 9:36; 10:10, 17; 2 Chr 21:12-15; Mal 4:5-6; Matt 11:14; 16:14; 17:1-13; 27:45-49; Mark 6:15; 8:28; 9:2-13; 15:33-36; Luke 1:17; 4:26; 9:28-36; John 1:19-28; Rom 11:1-6; Jas 5:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Elijah Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 BC). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord. Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a...","summary_en":"Elijah Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 BC). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord. Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125333,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Jewish Leaders","title_en":"Jewish Leaders","content_ro":"<h3>Jewish Leaders<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him.<\/p>\n<p>When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Acts 14:19; 1 Thes 2:14; cp. Gal 1:13-14). The Greek term translated “Jewish leaders” could be literally translated as “Jews.” But the word took on this technical meaning to refer to the Temple leadership who confronted Jesus, judged him, and orchestrated his crucifixion (see John 1:19; 2:18; 5:9-18; 9:18-22). This is important because the New Testament—particularly John’s Gospel—has often been seen as anti-Semitic. But the truth is that Jesus, who was himself a Jew, did not wrestle with “Jews” in general. His antagonists were the “Jewish leaders”—the brokers of religious power in first-century Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 1:19-24; 2:18-20; 5:9-18; 7:1, 10-13, 35-36; 9:13-34; 11:45-54; 12:41-43; 18:28-36; 19:6-8, 12-16, 31, 38; 20:19; Acts 6:10-12; 7:54-58; 12:11; 21:11; 25:1-3, 7; 26:1-11; 28:17-24; 2 Corinthians 11:24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jewish Leaders<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him.<\/p>\n<p>When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Acts 14:19; 1 Thes 2:14; cp. Gal 1:13-14). The Greek term translated “Jewish leaders” could be literally translated as “Jews.” But the word took on this technical meaning to refer to the Temple leadership who confronted Jesus, judged him, and orchestrated his crucifixion (see John 1:19; 2:18; 5:9-18; 9:18-22). This is important because the New Testament—particularly John’s Gospel—has often been seen as anti-Semitic. But the truth is that Jesus, who was himself a Jew, did not wrestle with “Jews” in general. His antagonists were the “Jewish leaders”—the brokers of religious power in first-century Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 1:19-24; 2:18-20; 5:9-18; 7:1, 10-13, 35-36; 9:13-34; 11:45-54; 12:41-43; 18:28-36; 19:6-8, 12-16, 31, 38; 20:19; Acts 6:10-12; 7:54-58; 12:11; 21:11; 25:1-3, 7; 26:1-11; 28:17-24; 2 Corinthians 11:24<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jewish Leaders Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him. When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Ac...","summary_en":"Jewish Leaders Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him. When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Ac...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20203,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel of John","title_en":"Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>JOHN, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>The fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospels. (See discussion above on John, the Apostle.)<\/p>\n\n<p>The Gospel appears to have been written by one who knew the Jews and the Palestine of Jesus’ day well. He was familiar with Jewish messianic expectations (e.g., Jn 1:20-21; 4:25; 7:40-42; 12:34). He knew of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9) and the contempt the Pharisees had for “the people of the land” (7:49). He knew of the importance attached to the religious schools (v 15). He knew the way the Sabbath was observed and was aware of the provision that the obligation to circumcise on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath regulations (vv 22-23). Throughout the Gospel he moved with certainty in the vast range of Jewish ideas and customs.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same with topography. The writer mentioned many places, and his place-names all seem to be used correctly. He referred to Cana, a village not mentioned in any earlier literature known to us, which means that the reference almost certainly came from someone who actually knew the place. He located Bethany with some precision as about 15 stadia from Jerusalem (about 2 miles, or 3.2 kilometers, 11:18). He had several references to places in or near Jerusalem, such as Bethesda (5:2), Siloam (9:7), and the Kidron Valley (18:1). Of course, this does not rule out some contemporary of John’s, but it makes it difficult to think of the author as a much later individual writing at a distance from Palestine. The evidence as we have it indicates that the writer was a Jew in the Palestine of Jesus’ day.<\/p>\n<p>To many careful readers, it seems that the Gospel bears the stamp of an eyewitness. For example, Jesus was teaching “in the treasury” (8:20). Nothing is made of the point; the incident could easily have been told without it. It looks like a reminiscence of someone who sees the scene in his mind’s eye as he writes. The fact that the house was filled with fragrance when the woman broke the perfume jar (12:3) does not materially affect the account but is the kind of detail that one who was there would remember. The author noted that the loaves used in the feeding of the multitude were barley loaves (6:9) and that Jesus’ tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top to bottom (19:23). He told us that the branches with which Jesus was greeted were palm branches (12:13), and that it was night when Judas went out (13:30). Such touches are found throughout the Gospel, and it seems unjustified to treat them as no more than an attempt to create verisimilitude. They seem much more like indications that the author was writing about events in which he had himself taken part.<\/p>\n<p>The early church accepted Johannine authorship without question. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all see the apostle as the author. The first to quote this Gospel by name was Theophilus of Antioch, about <span>AD<\/span> 180.<\/p>\n<p>Those who object to Johannine authorship emphasize the differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics. The argument is that if Jesus was anything like the Christ portrayed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he could not be like the Christ of the fourth Gospel. This is a completely subjective argument, ignoring the fact that any great man will appear differently to different people. The judgment of the church throughout the centuries has been that Jesus was large enough to inspire both portraits. To put the same point another way, we have no reason for holding that the first three Evangelists tell us all there is to know about Jesus. There is no contradiction. John simply brings out other aspects of Jesus’ life and teachings.<\/p>\n<p>While we cannot prove beyond all doubt that John the apostle was the author, we can say that there is more reason for holding to this view than to any other.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>It has been usual for conservatives and liberals alike to date this writing in the last decade of the first century or early in the second. Some liberal scholars have put it well into the second century, but this is not common, and it is remarkable that there has been such a considerable measure of agreement.<\/p>\n<p>It is said that this Gospel is dependent on the Synoptics, which means that it must be dated sometime after them. But this argument has been widely abandoned in recent times. There is so much in John that is without parallel in the other three Gospels, and conversely so much in the other three that John might have used had he known it, that it is very difficult indeed to hold that this writer had any of the other Gospels before him when he wrote, or even that he had read them. Such resemblances as there are seem better explained by common use of oral tradition.<\/p>\n<p>It is also argued that there is a very developed theology in John and that we must allow time for its development. Granted, the theology of this Gospel is profound, but this does not require that we must wait for it until the end of the first century. The theology of the Letter to the Romans is also profound, and there is no reason for dating that writing later than the 50s. On the ground of development, then, there is no reason for putting John later than Romans. Development is a slippery argument at best, for it usually takes place at uneven rates, and we have no means of knowing how fast it took place in the area where the author lived.<\/p>\n<p>Other arguments for a late date are no more conclusive. For example, it is urged that the ecclesiastical system presupposed by the Gospel is too late for the time of the apostle John, and that the sacramental system of chapters 3 and 6 must have taken time to develop. But John does not mention any sacrament. It is true that many scholars think these chapters refer to baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but the fact is that John mentions neither.<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising in view of the way the traditional arguments have crumbled away that many in recent times are arguing that John must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70. If it were later, why does not John have some reference to it? Some of his language appears to be earlier. In 5:2 he says there “is” (not “was”) a pool called Bethesda. And he often refers to the Twelve as Jesus’ disciples, or “his” disciples, or the like. In later times Christians usually said “the” disciples, for they saw no need to say whose the disciples were. But in the early days, when Christians were in contact with rabbis (each of whom had his disciples), it was important to show that Jesus’ disciples were in mind. It is important also that John makes no reference to any of the synoptic Gospels. The simplest explanation is that he had not seen them. They were not yet widely circulated.<\/p>\n<p>None of this enables us to date this Gospel with precision. But the weight of evidence points to an early date (before <span>AD<\/span> 70).<\/p>\n<p>The author was John the apostle, a Jew. However, the writing gives evidence of contact with Greek thought, for example, in the reference to Christ as “the Word” in chapter 1 and the translation of words like “rabbi” (1:38). It is almost universally held that such considerations compel us to see the work as originating in a center of Greek culture, and Ephesus has traditionally been favored. Before the end of the second century we have Irenaeus writing that John published the Gospel during his residence at Ephesus.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to similarities between John and the Odes of Solomon, which they think came from Syria. As there are also some resemblances in the language of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, this is held to show that John was written in Syria, probably at Antioch. Others again think that Egypt was the place, and they support this by pointing out that the oldest fragment of a manuscript of this Gospel was found there. There is no real evidence, and we are left with probabilities. There is much to be said for accepting the evidence of Irenaeus and seeing Ephesus as the place of origin, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>There is no real indication of the intended destination. From 20:31 we learn that the book was written that the readers might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and that by believing they might have life. The Gospel, then, has an evangelistic aim. But it is also possible that “believe” means “keep on believing”—“go on in faith,” rather than “begin to believe.” That is to say, the book may have been meant from the beginning to build people up in the faith. Probably we should not distinguish between these aims too sharply. Both may well be in mind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Several possible backgrounds to the Gospel have been suggested. The Greek interest is obvious, and this writing has sometimes been called the Gospel of the Hellenists. The suggestion is that we should look to Greek writings, perhaps the works of the philosophers or Philo of Alexandria, to find the right background against which to understand what John has written. This approach may be seen in the work of Rudolf Bultmann, who thought specifically of Gnosticism. Indeed, for Bultmann one of the sources of this Gospel was a discourse source that he thought was taken from non-Christian Gnosticism. Not many have been prepared to follow Bultmann, but a number of recent commentators have discerned some form of Gnosticism as the backdrop to John.<\/p>\n<p>While such views are put forward seriously, there are some substantial objections. One is that, despite the confident assertions of some scholars, Gnosticism has never been shown to be earlier than Christianity. In the form in which it comes before us in history, it is a Christian heresy, and of course, the Christian faith must appear before a Christian heresy is possible. Another objection is that there is a basic difference between the two systems. Gnosticism is concerned with knowledge (the very word is derived from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>,<\/em> “knowledge”). Its “redeemer” is one who comes from heaven with knowledge. But John does not subscribe to the view that man is saved by knowledge. The Redeemer comes to take away the sin of the world (1:29). Gnosticism tells people that life is an upward struggle; Christianity tells of a Savior who came down to raise them up. It is not easy to see any form of Gnosticism as the essential background to Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Much more significant is John’s Semitic background. Especially important here is the OT, accepted as sacred Scripture by Jew and Christian alike. It lies constantly behind John’s statements, and it must be studied carefully if John is to be understood. It is plain that John knew and loved the Septuagint, the translation into Greek of the Hebrew OT. Again and again, the Septuagint can be shown to lie behind what John says.<\/p>\n<p>In modern times important discoveries have been made at Qumran, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. Among the scrolls unearthed in the caves of this area are several that have affinities with John. Indeed, one of the interesting facts about the scrolls is that they have more parallels with John than with any other part of the NT, a fact difficult to explain if John was written late and at a distance from Palestine. The resemblances to the Qumran writings must be viewed with care, for there is often a linguistic resemblance where the thinking is quite different. For example, both use the unusual expression “the Spirit of truth.” But where John means one of the persons of the Trinity, the scrolls speak of “a spirit of truth” and “a spirit of error” striving in the souls of people. The connection is real, but John is clearly not dependent on the scrolls for his thinking. The contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they afford additional evidence that this Gospel is basically Palestinian and must be understood against a background of first-century Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Other backgrounds have been suggested, such as the Hermetic literature. This is a group of writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus (“Hermes Thrice-greatest”), a designation of the Egyptian god Thoth. There are indeed some points of contact with John, but they are few in comparison with those of writings rooted in Palestine. It is difficult to take such suggestions seriously. John is essentially Palestinian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The writer told us that Jesus did many “signs” (or miracles) that he had not recorded, but “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life” (Jn 20:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). John wrote to show that Jesus is the Messiah. But he did not do this simply with a view to conveying interesting information. He wanted his readers to see this knowledge as a challenge to faith; when they believe, they will have life. John sought to bring men and women to Christ; he had an evangelistic aim. That does not exhaust what he was trying to do, for his words have meaning for believers. It is important that believers have a right knowledge of Jesus and that they continue to believe.<\/p>\n<p>The main theological teaching of this Gospel, then, is that God has sent his Messiah, Jesus. He is the very Son of God, and he comes to bring life (3:16). Though Jesus told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, this is not often said so specifically. The avoidance of the term might well be because of the political overtones it had acquired among the Jews at large. They looked for a Messiah who would fight the Romans. He would defeat them and set up a mighty world empire with its capital in Jerusalem. Jesus was not aiming at anything like that, and it was important that he avoid the kind of language that would give that impression. But though the conventional messianic terminology is avoided, John left no doubt that Jesus was God’s chosen one. Again and again he depicted Jesus as fulfilling messianic functions. For example, in the long discourse in chapter 6 we see Jesus as the bread from heaven, fulfilling the expectation that when Messiah came, he would renew the manna; and in the giving of sight to the blind man (ch 9) we have another messianic function (cf. Is 35:5).<\/p>\n<p>With this greatness of Jesus, John also combined teaching about his lowliness. A continuing, though unobtrusive, strand of Johannine teaching is that Jesus depends on the Father for everything. Apart from the Father, Jesus said, he could do nothing (Jn 5:30). His very food is to do the Father’s will (4:34). He lives through the Father (6:57). It is the Father who gives him his disciples (6:37, 44; 17:6). It is the Father who bears witness to him (5:32, 37). John insists that Jesus is in no sense independent of the Father. In the mission of Jesus, John sees the working out of the purpose of the Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue and Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>John begins with a prologue (1:1-18) that is unlike anything in any of the other Gospels. In it he refers to Jesus as “the Word,” a term that has points of contact with both Greek and Hebrew thinking. As John uses it, it conveys the thought that Jesus is the expression of the mind of the Father. John speaks of the Word as God (1:1), sees him as active in creation (1:3-5), goes on to the witness borne to him by John the Baptist (1:6-8), speaks of the coming of the Word into the world (1:9-14), and finishes with a section on the greatness of the Word (1:15-18). In this prologue he briefly introduces some of the great themes that will be developed throughout the Gospel. It is a majestic introduction to the whole.<\/p>\n<p>Next we have the beginnings of Jesus’ public ministry (1:19-51). Jesus’ work was preceded by that of John the Baptist, and the Evangelist tells us first about the kind of witness that the Baptist gave to Jesus. Witness is one of his important concepts, and witness is all that John the Baptist does in this Gospel. From this witness we move to the way the first disciples came to Jesus. We learn something of how Andrew and Peter came to know the Lord. We read also of Philip and Nathanael, of whom we learn little or nothing in the other Gospels.<\/p>\n<h5>The Signs and Discourses (2:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The public ministry of Jesus is described in a very distinctive way in this Gospel. John has a long section (chs 2–12) in which he tells of a number of miracles Jesus did, interweaving into his account a series of discourses. Sometimes these are addresses given to groups of people, and sometimes they are talks with individuals. Some scholars call this section of the Gospel the Book of Signs, thus emphasizing the prominent place given to seven miracles. For John they are not simply wonders. They are meaningful; in the literal sense of the term they are <em>sign<\/em>ificant.<\/p>\n<p>The first of them is the turning of the water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee (2:1-11). The water in question is connected with Jewish rites of purification (v 6), and the story is surely to teach us that Jesus transforms life. He changes the water of the law into the wine of the gospel. As a result of this “sign,” his disciples believed in him (v 11). John went on to tell how Jesus went up to Jerusalem and drove the traders out of the temple. They were selling animals for sacrifice and changing money. But their business was being done in the Court of the Gentiles, the only place in the temple where a Gentile could come to meditate and pray.<\/p>\n<p>The first discourse is on the new birth (3:1-21). Jesus talked with Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, about the necessity for radical renewal if one is to enter the kingdom. Jesus was speaking of God’s regenerating activity, not some human reformation. Following this, John records a dispute between some of John’s disciples with a Jew on the subject of purification. This opens the way for a section that shows the superiority of Jesus over John the Baptist—by the Baptist’s own confession (3:22-36).<\/p>\n<p>The second discourse is really a long conversation Jesus had with the woman of Samaria, whom he met by a well (4:1-42). It turns on “the water of life,” a term that is not fully explained in this chapter but which we later find points to the life-giving Spirit (7:38-39). This leads to the story of the second sign, the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54), notable for the fact that Jesus healed at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>The third sign is the healing of the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (5:1-18). This man had spent many years waiting for healing at the moving of the water. Jesus told him to get up and walk, and he did. Because it was done on a Sabbath, the Pharisees objected. This leads to Jesus’ third discourse, that on the divine Son (5:19-47). Here the closeness of the relationship of Jesus to the Father is stressed, and his place in the judgment is brought out. There is emphasis also on the variety of witness who encountered Jesus, which shows how reasonable it is to accept him as God’s own Son.<\/p>\n<p>John’s fourth sign is the one miracle (apart from the resurrection) found in all four Gospels: the feeding of the 5,000 (6:1-15). It is followed by Jesus’ walking on water (vv 16-21), which seems to be meant as the fifth sign (though some scholars think not; if they are right, there are only six signs). Then comes the fourth discourse, the great sermon on the bread of life (vv 22-59). Jesus is this bread, which he gives to all men and women who believe in him. There are references to eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv 50-58), which point to his death. Some have seen in them a reference to Communion, but it is hard to see why Jesus should refer in this way to an as-yet-nonexistent sacrament. Moreover, much the same effect is attributed in the same discourse to believing (vv 35, 47). It seems best to understand Jesus as meaning that people must believe in him as the one who would die for them in order for them to have life.<\/p>\n<p>There is a section detailing Peter’s affirmation of loyalty in the face of some who drifted away from the Master (6:67-71). Then we come to the fifth discourse, on the life-giving Spirit (7:1-52). John has an important explanatory point of his own when he tells us that at the time the Spirit had not been given because Jesus had not yet been glorified (v 39). The fullness of the Spirit depends on the completion of the work of Christ in his death and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The sixth discourse tells of the light of the world (8:12-59). This aspect of Jesus’ person and ministry is dramatically brought out in the sixth sign, the healing of the man born blind (ch 9). It is a lively narrative, as the healed man conducts a spirited defense against the Pharisees who belittled Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most beautiful of all the illustrations of Jesus’ relations to his people is that on which he dwells in the seventh discourse, where he speaks of himself as the good shepherd (ch 10). There is the obvious truth that sheep depend entirely on their shepherd, but Jesus says something else. Whereas earthly shepherds live to meet the needs of their sheep, Jesus laid down his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The final sign is the raising of Lazarus (11:1-44), a man who had been dead for four days. The story graphically brings out Jesus’ power over death and his readiness to confer the gift of life. Jesus speaks of himself as “the resurrection and the life” (v 25); death cannot defeat him. He brings life to the dead, to the spiritually dead as well as to physically dead Lazarus. John goes on to note the reaction to this miracle: some believed, but some opposed Jesus (vv 45-57). He includes a notable saying of Caiaphas, the high priest, that one man should die for the people (vv 50-52). Caiaphas was speaking as a cynical politician (better one dead, however innocent, than the whole nation be troubled). But John saw in the words the deeper meaning that Jesus’ death would bring salvation to many.<\/p>\n<p>John rounds off his account of the ministry with the story of the anointing of Jesus by a woman in Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the coming of some Greeks to Jesus, and his final summary of what he had taught (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Last Supper<\/h5>\n<p>The account of what went on in the upper room on the night before the Crucifixion is the fullest of all the four Gospels. Curiously, John says nothing about the institution of Communion, a fact that has never been satisfactorily explained. But he tells us how Jesus washed the feet of the disciples (13:1-17), an action splendidly exemplifying the spirit of lowly service so soon to be shown on the cross. Then comes the prophecy of the betrayal, an action that set in motion the events that would lead to the cross (vv 18-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the long discourse that follows, Jesus dealt with some questions posed by his followers and went on to teach them some important truths, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). He develops the thought that he is the true vine, the disciples being vitally joined to him as branches to the vine. It is important for the branches to remain in the vine if they are to have life (15:1-16). Then come some words about suffering that would be of help to them in times of persecution (vv 17-25). Jesus goes on to speak about the Holy Spirit (15:26–16:15). This is a very important passage, for it contains much more about the Spirit than we find elsewhere in Jesus’ words. Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete,” a title not easy to understand. It is in origin a legal term, and at least we can say that it indicates that the Spirit brings friendship, encouragement, and help. Jesus went on to speak of his approaching departure from the disciples and to prepare them for the trying time ahead (16:16-33). This part of the Gospel concludes with Jesus’ great High Priestly prayer. He prayed for the disciples to be one, as he commended them to the care of the heavenly Father (ch 17).<\/p>\n<h5>The Cross and Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, he went forward to meet them and they fell to the ground (18:1-11). He gave himself over to them; they did not take him over. At the outset of his passion narrative, John was making the point that Jesus is sovereign. He was not being defeated by the march of events but was sovereignly doing the will of the Father. John is the only one to tell us that Jesus was taken before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, the reigning high priest (18:12-14, 19-24). He tells also of Peter’s three denials of Jesus (vv 15-27). He did not spend much time on the Jewish trial, but he was much more explicit than the other Evangelists in his account of the Roman trial. Clearly, he had some special knowledge of what went on before Pilate. He presents a magnificent picture of Jesus talking with Pilate about kingship—the Son of God discussing with the representative of Caesar the meaning of sovereignty (vv 33-40).<\/p>\n<p>In his account of the Crucifixion John has a number of touches of his own, notably the way Jesus commended Mary to the care of the beloved disciple (19:26-27), the fact that the cry Jesus uttered as he died was “It is finished” (v 30), and the piercing of his side by a soldier’s spear (vv 31-37).<\/p>\n<p>John proceeds to the narrative of the burial (vv 38-42) and of the empty tomb (20:1-10). He speaks of appearances of the risen Lord to Mary Magdalene (vv 11-18), and to the disciples—both without (vv 19-23) and with Thomas (vv 24-29).<\/p>\n<p>The final chapter, an epilogue, tells of a miraculous catch of fish (21:1-14) and goes on to the moving account of Peter’s threefold declaration of love to Jesus and his restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOHN, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>The fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospels. (See discussion above on John, the Apostle.)<\/p>\n\n<p>The Gospel appears to have been written by one who knew the Jews and the Palestine of Jesus’ day well. He was familiar with Jewish messianic expectations (e.g., Jn 1:20-21; 4:25; 7:40-42; 12:34). He knew of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9) and the contempt the Pharisees had for “the people of the land” (7:49). He knew of the importance attached to the religious schools (v 15). He knew the way the Sabbath was observed and was aware of the provision that the obligation to circumcise on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath regulations (vv 22-23). Throughout the Gospel he moved with certainty in the vast range of Jewish ideas and customs.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same with topography. The writer mentioned many places, and his place-names all seem to be used correctly. He referred to Cana, a village not mentioned in any earlier literature known to us, which means that the reference almost certainly came from someone who actually knew the place. He located Bethany with some precision as about 15 stadia from Jerusalem (about 2 miles, or 3.2 kilometers, 11:18). He had several references to places in or near Jerusalem, such as Bethesda (5:2), Siloam (9:7), and the Kidron Valley (18:1). Of course, this does not rule out some contemporary of John’s, but it makes it difficult to think of the author as a much later individual writing at a distance from Palestine. The evidence as we have it indicates that the writer was a Jew in the Palestine of Jesus’ day.<\/p>\n<p>To many careful readers, it seems that the Gospel bears the stamp of an eyewitness. For example, Jesus was teaching “in the treasury” (8:20). Nothing is made of the point; the incident could easily have been told without it. It looks like a reminiscence of someone who sees the scene in his mind’s eye as he writes. The fact that the house was filled with fragrance when the woman broke the perfume jar (12:3) does not materially affect the account but is the kind of detail that one who was there would remember. The author noted that the loaves used in the feeding of the multitude were barley loaves (6:9) and that Jesus’ tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top to bottom (19:23). He told us that the branches with which Jesus was greeted were palm branches (12:13), and that it was night when Judas went out (13:30). Such touches are found throughout the Gospel, and it seems unjustified to treat them as no more than an attempt to create verisimilitude. They seem much more like indications that the author was writing about events in which he had himself taken part.<\/p>\n<p>The early church accepted Johannine authorship without question. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all see the apostle as the author. The first to quote this Gospel by name was Theophilus of Antioch, about <span>AD<\/span> 180.<\/p>\n<p>Those who object to Johannine authorship emphasize the differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics. The argument is that if Jesus was anything like the Christ portrayed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he could not be like the Christ of the fourth Gospel. This is a completely subjective argument, ignoring the fact that any great man will appear differently to different people. The judgment of the church throughout the centuries has been that Jesus was large enough to inspire both portraits. To put the same point another way, we have no reason for holding that the first three Evangelists tell us all there is to know about Jesus. There is no contradiction. John simply brings out other aspects of Jesus’ life and teachings.<\/p>\n<p>While we cannot prove beyond all doubt that John the apostle was the author, we can say that there is more reason for holding to this view than to any other.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>It has been usual for conservatives and liberals alike to date this writing in the last decade of the first century or early in the second. Some liberal scholars have put it well into the second century, but this is not common, and it is remarkable that there has been such a considerable measure of agreement.<\/p>\n<p>It is said that this Gospel is dependent on the Synoptics, which means that it must be dated sometime after them. But this argument has been widely abandoned in recent times. There is so much in John that is without parallel in the other three Gospels, and conversely so much in the other three that John might have used had he known it, that it is very difficult indeed to hold that this writer had any of the other Gospels before him when he wrote, or even that he had read them. Such resemblances as there are seem better explained by common use of oral tradition.<\/p>\n<p>It is also argued that there is a very developed theology in John and that we must allow time for its development. Granted, the theology of this Gospel is profound, but this does not require that we must wait for it until the end of the first century. The theology of the Letter to the Romans is also profound, and there is no reason for dating that writing later than the 50s. On the ground of development, then, there is no reason for putting John later than Romans. Development is a slippery argument at best, for it usually takes place at uneven rates, and we have no means of knowing how fast it took place in the area where the author lived.<\/p>\n<p>Other arguments for a late date are no more conclusive. For example, it is urged that the ecclesiastical system presupposed by the Gospel is too late for the time of the apostle John, and that the sacramental system of chapters 3 and 6 must have taken time to develop. But John does not mention any sacrament. It is true that many scholars think these chapters refer to baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but the fact is that John mentions neither.<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising in view of the way the traditional arguments have crumbled away that many in recent times are arguing that John must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70. If it were later, why does not John have some reference to it? Some of his language appears to be earlier. In 5:2 he says there “is” (not “was”) a pool called Bethesda. And he often refers to the Twelve as Jesus’ disciples, or “his” disciples, or the like. In later times Christians usually said “the” disciples, for they saw no need to say whose the disciples were. But in the early days, when Christians were in contact with rabbis (each of whom had his disciples), it was important to show that Jesus’ disciples were in mind. It is important also that John makes no reference to any of the synoptic Gospels. The simplest explanation is that he had not seen them. They were not yet widely circulated.<\/p>\n<p>None of this enables us to date this Gospel with precision. But the weight of evidence points to an early date (before <span>AD<\/span> 70).<\/p>\n<p>The author was John the apostle, a Jew. However, the writing gives evidence of contact with Greek thought, for example, in the reference to Christ as “the Word” in chapter 1 and the translation of words like “rabbi” (1:38). It is almost universally held that such considerations compel us to see the work as originating in a center of Greek culture, and Ephesus has traditionally been favored. Before the end of the second century we have Irenaeus writing that John published the Gospel during his residence at Ephesus.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to similarities between John and the Odes of Solomon, which they think came from Syria. As there are also some resemblances in the language of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, this is held to show that John was written in Syria, probably at Antioch. Others again think that Egypt was the place, and they support this by pointing out that the oldest fragment of a manuscript of this Gospel was found there. There is no real evidence, and we are left with probabilities. There is much to be said for accepting the evidence of Irenaeus and seeing Ephesus as the place of origin, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>There is no real indication of the intended destination. From 20:31 we learn that the book was written that the readers might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and that by believing they might have life. The Gospel, then, has an evangelistic aim. But it is also possible that “believe” means “keep on believing”—“go on in faith,” rather than “begin to believe.” That is to say, the book may have been meant from the beginning to build people up in the faith. Probably we should not distinguish between these aims too sharply. Both may well be in mind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Several possible backgrounds to the Gospel have been suggested. The Greek interest is obvious, and this writing has sometimes been called the Gospel of the Hellenists. The suggestion is that we should look to Greek writings, perhaps the works of the philosophers or Philo of Alexandria, to find the right background against which to understand what John has written. This approach may be seen in the work of Rudolf Bultmann, who thought specifically of Gnosticism. Indeed, for Bultmann one of the sources of this Gospel was a discourse source that he thought was taken from non-Christian Gnosticism. Not many have been prepared to follow Bultmann, but a number of recent commentators have discerned some form of Gnosticism as the backdrop to John.<\/p>\n<p>While such views are put forward seriously, there are some substantial objections. One is that, despite the confident assertions of some scholars, Gnosticism has never been shown to be earlier than Christianity. In the form in which it comes before us in history, it is a Christian heresy, and of course, the Christian faith must appear before a Christian heresy is possible. Another objection is that there is a basic difference between the two systems. Gnosticism is concerned with knowledge (the very word is derived from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>,<\/em> “knowledge”). Its “redeemer” is one who comes from heaven with knowledge. But John does not subscribe to the view that man is saved by knowledge. The Redeemer comes to take away the sin of the world (1:29). Gnosticism tells people that life is an upward struggle; Christianity tells of a Savior who came down to raise them up. It is not easy to see any form of Gnosticism as the essential background to Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Much more significant is John’s Semitic background. Especially important here is the OT, accepted as sacred Scripture by Jew and Christian alike. It lies constantly behind John’s statements, and it must be studied carefully if John is to be understood. It is plain that John knew and loved the Septuagint, the translation into Greek of the Hebrew OT. Again and again, the Septuagint can be shown to lie behind what John says.<\/p>\n<p>In modern times important discoveries have been made at Qumran, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. Among the scrolls unearthed in the caves of this area are several that have affinities with John. Indeed, one of the interesting facts about the scrolls is that they have more parallels with John than with any other part of the NT, a fact difficult to explain if John was written late and at a distance from Palestine. The resemblances to the Qumran writings must be viewed with care, for there is often a linguistic resemblance where the thinking is quite different. For example, both use the unusual expression “the Spirit of truth.” But where John means one of the persons of the Trinity, the scrolls speak of “a spirit of truth” and “a spirit of error” striving in the souls of people. The connection is real, but John is clearly not dependent on the scrolls for his thinking. The contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they afford additional evidence that this Gospel is basically Palestinian and must be understood against a background of first-century Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Other backgrounds have been suggested, such as the Hermetic literature. This is a group of writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus (“Hermes Thrice-greatest”), a designation of the Egyptian god Thoth. There are indeed some points of contact with John, but they are few in comparison with those of writings rooted in Palestine. It is difficult to take such suggestions seriously. John is essentially Palestinian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The writer told us that Jesus did many “signs” (or miracles) that he had not recorded, but “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life” (Jn 20:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). John wrote to show that Jesus is the Messiah. But he did not do this simply with a view to conveying interesting information. He wanted his readers to see this knowledge as a challenge to faith; when they believe, they will have life. John sought to bring men and women to Christ; he had an evangelistic aim. That does not exhaust what he was trying to do, for his words have meaning for believers. It is important that believers have a right knowledge of Jesus and that they continue to believe.<\/p>\n<p>The main theological teaching of this Gospel, then, is that God has sent his Messiah, Jesus. He is the very Son of God, and he comes to bring life (3:16). Though Jesus told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, this is not often said so specifically. The avoidance of the term might well be because of the political overtones it had acquired among the Jews at large. They looked for a Messiah who would fight the Romans. He would defeat them and set up a mighty world empire with its capital in Jerusalem. Jesus was not aiming at anything like that, and it was important that he avoid the kind of language that would give that impression. But though the conventional messianic terminology is avoided, John left no doubt that Jesus was God’s chosen one. Again and again he depicted Jesus as fulfilling messianic functions. For example, in the long discourse in chapter 6 we see Jesus as the bread from heaven, fulfilling the expectation that when Messiah came, he would renew the manna; and in the giving of sight to the blind man (ch 9) we have another messianic function (cf. Is 35:5).<\/p>\n<p>With this greatness of Jesus, John also combined teaching about his lowliness. A continuing, though unobtrusive, strand of Johannine teaching is that Jesus depends on the Father for everything. Apart from the Father, Jesus said, he could do nothing (Jn 5:30). His very food is to do the Father’s will (4:34). He lives through the Father (6:57). It is the Father who gives him his disciples (6:37, 44; 17:6). It is the Father who bears witness to him (5:32, 37). John insists that Jesus is in no sense independent of the Father. In the mission of Jesus, John sees the working out of the purpose of the Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue and Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>John begins with a prologue (1:1-18) that is unlike anything in any of the other Gospels. In it he refers to Jesus as “the Word,” a term that has points of contact with both Greek and Hebrew thinking. As John uses it, it conveys the thought that Jesus is the expression of the mind of the Father. John speaks of the Word as God (1:1), sees him as active in creation (1:3-5), goes on to the witness borne to him by John the Baptist (1:6-8), speaks of the coming of the Word into the world (1:9-14), and finishes with a section on the greatness of the Word (1:15-18). In this prologue he briefly introduces some of the great themes that will be developed throughout the Gospel. It is a majestic introduction to the whole.<\/p>\n<p>Next we have the beginnings of Jesus’ public ministry (1:19-51). Jesus’ work was preceded by that of John the Baptist, and the Evangelist tells us first about the kind of witness that the Baptist gave to Jesus. Witness is one of his important concepts, and witness is all that John the Baptist does in this Gospel. From this witness we move to the way the first disciples came to Jesus. We learn something of how Andrew and Peter came to know the Lord. We read also of Philip and Nathanael, of whom we learn little or nothing in the other Gospels.<\/p>\n<h5>The Signs and Discourses (2:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The public ministry of Jesus is described in a very distinctive way in this Gospel. John has a long section (chs 2–12) in which he tells of a number of miracles Jesus did, interweaving into his account a series of discourses. Sometimes these are addresses given to groups of people, and sometimes they are talks with individuals. Some scholars call this section of the Gospel the Book of Signs, thus emphasizing the prominent place given to seven miracles. For John they are not simply wonders. They are meaningful; in the literal sense of the term they are <em>sign<\/em>ificant.<\/p>\n<p>The first of them is the turning of the water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee (2:1-11). The water in question is connected with Jewish rites of purification (v 6), and the story is surely to teach us that Jesus transforms life. He changes the water of the law into the wine of the gospel. As a result of this “sign,” his disciples believed in him (v 11). John went on to tell how Jesus went up to Jerusalem and drove the traders out of the temple. They were selling animals for sacrifice and changing money. But their business was being done in the Court of the Gentiles, the only place in the temple where a Gentile could come to meditate and pray.<\/p>\n<p>The first discourse is on the new birth (3:1-21). Jesus talked with Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, about the necessity for radical renewal if one is to enter the kingdom. Jesus was speaking of God’s regenerating activity, not some human reformation. Following this, John records a dispute between some of John’s disciples with a Jew on the subject of purification. This opens the way for a section that shows the superiority of Jesus over John the Baptist—by the Baptist’s own confession (3:22-36).<\/p>\n<p>The second discourse is really a long conversation Jesus had with the woman of Samaria, whom he met by a well (4:1-42). It turns on “the water of life,” a term that is not fully explained in this chapter but which we later find points to the life-giving Spirit (7:38-39). This leads to the story of the second sign, the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54), notable for the fact that Jesus healed at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>The third sign is the healing of the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (5:1-18). This man had spent many years waiting for healing at the moving of the water. Jesus told him to get up and walk, and he did. Because it was done on a Sabbath, the Pharisees objected. This leads to Jesus’ third discourse, that on the divine Son (5:19-47). Here the closeness of the relationship of Jesus to the Father is stressed, and his place in the judgment is brought out. There is emphasis also on the variety of witness who encountered Jesus, which shows how reasonable it is to accept him as God’s own Son.<\/p>\n<p>John’s fourth sign is the one miracle (apart from the resurrection) found in all four Gospels: the feeding of the 5,000 (6:1-15). It is followed by Jesus’ walking on water (vv 16-21), which seems to be meant as the fifth sign (though some scholars think not; if they are right, there are only six signs). Then comes the fourth discourse, the great sermon on the bread of life (vv 22-59). Jesus is this bread, which he gives to all men and women who believe in him. There are references to eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv 50-58), which point to his death. Some have seen in them a reference to Communion, but it is hard to see why Jesus should refer in this way to an as-yet-nonexistent sacrament. Moreover, much the same effect is attributed in the same discourse to believing (vv 35, 47). It seems best to understand Jesus as meaning that people must believe in him as the one who would die for them in order for them to have life.<\/p>\n<p>There is a section detailing Peter’s affirmation of loyalty in the face of some who drifted away from the Master (6:67-71). Then we come to the fifth discourse, on the life-giving Spirit (7:1-52). John has an important explanatory point of his own when he tells us that at the time the Spirit had not been given because Jesus had not yet been glorified (v 39). The fullness of the Spirit depends on the completion of the work of Christ in his death and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The sixth discourse tells of the light of the world (8:12-59). This aspect of Jesus’ person and ministry is dramatically brought out in the sixth sign, the healing of the man born blind (ch 9). It is a lively narrative, as the healed man conducts a spirited defense against the Pharisees who belittled Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most beautiful of all the illustrations of Jesus’ relations to his people is that on which he dwells in the seventh discourse, where he speaks of himself as the good shepherd (ch 10). There is the obvious truth that sheep depend entirely on their shepherd, but Jesus says something else. Whereas earthly shepherds live to meet the needs of their sheep, Jesus laid down his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The final sign is the raising of Lazarus (11:1-44), a man who had been dead for four days. The story graphically brings out Jesus’ power over death and his readiness to confer the gift of life. Jesus speaks of himself as “the resurrection and the life” (v 25); death cannot defeat him. He brings life to the dead, to the spiritually dead as well as to physically dead Lazarus. John goes on to note the reaction to this miracle: some believed, but some opposed Jesus (vv 45-57). He includes a notable saying of Caiaphas, the high priest, that one man should die for the people (vv 50-52). Caiaphas was speaking as a cynical politician (better one dead, however innocent, than the whole nation be troubled). But John saw in the words the deeper meaning that Jesus’ death would bring salvation to many.<\/p>\n<p>John rounds off his account of the ministry with the story of the anointing of Jesus by a woman in Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the coming of some Greeks to Jesus, and his final summary of what he had taught (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Last Supper<\/h5>\n<p>The account of what went on in the upper room on the night before the Crucifixion is the fullest of all the four Gospels. Curiously, John says nothing about the institution of Communion, a fact that has never been satisfactorily explained. But he tells us how Jesus washed the feet of the disciples (13:1-17), an action splendidly exemplifying the spirit of lowly service so soon to be shown on the cross. Then comes the prophecy of the betrayal, an action that set in motion the events that would lead to the cross (vv 18-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the long discourse that follows, Jesus dealt with some questions posed by his followers and went on to teach them some important truths, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). He develops the thought that he is the true vine, the disciples being vitally joined to him as branches to the vine. It is important for the branches to remain in the vine if they are to have life (15:1-16). Then come some words about suffering that would be of help to them in times of persecution (vv 17-25). Jesus goes on to speak about the Holy Spirit (15:26–16:15). This is a very important passage, for it contains much more about the Spirit than we find elsewhere in Jesus’ words. Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete,” a title not easy to understand. It is in origin a legal term, and at least we can say that it indicates that the Spirit brings friendship, encouragement, and help. Jesus went on to speak of his approaching departure from the disciples and to prepare them for the trying time ahead (16:16-33). This part of the Gospel concludes with Jesus’ great High Priestly prayer. He prayed for the disciples to be one, as he commended them to the care of the heavenly Father (ch 17).<\/p>\n<h5>The Cross and Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, he went forward to meet them and they fell to the ground (18:1-11). He gave himself over to them; they did not take him over. At the outset of his passion narrative, John was making the point that Jesus is sovereign. He was not being defeated by the march of events but was sovereignly doing the will of the Father. John is the only one to tell us that Jesus was taken before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, the reigning high priest (18:12-14, 19-24). He tells also of Peter’s three denials of Jesus (vv 15-27). He did not spend much time on the Jewish trial, but he was much more explicit than the other Evangelists in his account of the Roman trial. Clearly, he had some special knowledge of what went on before Pilate. He presents a magnificent picture of Jesus talking with Pilate about kingship—the Son of God discussing with the representative of Caesar the meaning of sovereignty (vv 33-40).<\/p>\n<p>In his account of the Crucifixion John has a number of touches of his own, notably the way Jesus commended Mary to the care of the beloved disciple (19:26-27), the fact that the cry Jesus uttered as he died was “It is finished” (v 30), and the piercing of his side by a soldier’s spear (vv 31-37).<\/p>\n<p>John proceeds to the narrative of the burial (vv 38-42) and of the empty tomb (20:1-10). He speaks of appearances of the risen Lord to Mary Magdalene (vv 11-18), and to the disciples—both without (vv 19-23) and with Thomas (vv 24-29).<\/p>\n<p>The final chapter, an epilogue, tells of a miraculous catch of fish (21:1-14) and goes on to the moving account of Peter’s threefold declaration of love to Jesus and his restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOHN, Gospel of The fourth Gospel. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospe...","summary_en":"JOHN, Gospel of The fourth Gospel. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospe...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":31370,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Priests and Levites","title_en":"Priests and Levites","content_ro":"<h3>PRIESTS AND LEVITES<\/h3>\n<p>Servants of God in the OT. There were three basic classes of religious personnel in ancient Israel: prophets, wise men, and priests and Levites. The classical prophets fulfilled a vocation but were not professionals; they were not paid for their task and functioned only in response to the particular call of God. The wise men were involved in government and education; some of their duties were secular, though they were also involved in moral education. The priests and Levites fulfilled a variety of essentially religious duties and were equivalent approximately to the clergy in modern times. They were professional men and were supported for their full-time religious work.<\/p>\n<p>The role of the priesthood may be seen most clearly in the context of Israelite religion as a whole. At the heart of religion was a relationship with God; to be an Israelite or a Jew was to know and maintain a continuous relationship with the living God. This relationship found its outward expression in a variety of contexts: the covenant, the temple, worship, and every facet of daily life. Thus religion, understood as a relationship, had two perspectives: the relationship with God and that with fellow human beings. It had both a personal and a communal dimension to it. The priests were the guardians and servants of this life of relationship, which was at the heart of OT religion; all their functions can best be understood within the context of a relationship between God and Israel. The prophets, too, were servants of the covenant relationship. While the priests functioned as the normal servants of religion, the prophets’ role was more that of calling a delinquent people back to the relationship with God in times of crisis.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, there are frequent references to both priests and Levites; in a number of biblical texts, however, the distinction is not clear (see, e.g., Dt 18:1-8). From the scholarly point of view, the precise relationship between priests and Levites is a continuing problem that has not yet been fully resolved. In general terms, only the sons of Aaron were to assume the role of priests; all other Levites would have religious functions, though technically they would not be priests. While this distinction is clear in most biblical texts, in others there is lack of certainty and clarity. It is clear, however, that <em>priests<\/em> (Levites descended from Aaron) and <em>Levites<\/em> (other than the descendants of Aaron) all had professional religious duties to perform. The precise nature of those duties varied from time to time in the course of Israel’s history.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Origins of the Priesthood<\/p>\n<p>• The High Priest<\/p>\n<p>• The Priests<\/p>\n<p>• The Levites<\/p>\n<p>• The History of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Priesthood in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheOriginsofthePriesthood\">The Origins of the Priesthood<\/p>\n<p>The priesthood in Israel began during the time of Moses and Aaron. The exodus from Egypt was not only the liberation of a group of Hebrew slaves but also the birth of the nation of Israel. The nation that was born in the exodus was given its constitution in the covenant of Sinai. The law of this covenant established the foundations and origins of Israelite priesthood. It provides insight into the three basic categories to be considered: the high priest, the priests, and the Levites.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheHighPriest\">The High Priest<\/p>\n<p>Any large and complex organization requires a head or leader, and this was true also of the Hebrew priesthood (though in its early days it was a small organization). The covenant was established through Moses, the prophet, through whom God gave the offer and substance of the covenant relationship; religious life within the covenant was to be the primary responsibility of Aaron, who was the first and chief priest.<\/p>\n<p>In the earliest days of Israel’s priesthood, it is probable that the high priest’s office was relatively informal; he was chief or leader among his fellow priests. The office was significant, nevertheless, and involved a special ritual of investiture, special clothing, and certain special responsibilities. While the high priest’s duties were similar in principle to those of other priests, he had certain exclusive responsibilities. To some extent, his duties were administrative, pertaining to all the priests of whom he had charge. But his position was more weighty than that of an administrator; just as all priests were the servants and guardians of the covenant relationship, so the high priest was chief servant and chief guardian. In his hands rested spiritual responsibility for the entire people of God, and therein lay the true honor and gravity of his position.<\/p>\n\n<p>This spiritual seniority of the high priest is seen most clearly in certain tasks he undertook within Israel’s life of worship. The clearest example may be seen in the annual observation of the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur). On that day alone, the high priest entered the Holy of Holies and, standing before the “mercy seat,” he sought God’s forgiveness and mercy for the whole nation of Israel (Lv 16:1-19). It is in that ceremony that Israel’s covenant faith is seen most clearly. Israel’s religion was one of relationship with a holy God, and human evil disrupted that relationship. While all worship and sacrifices throughout the year were concerned with the continuation of the relationship, the Day of Atonement was the most solemn day of the year, in which the attention of all the people focused upon the meaning of their existence. Life held meaning only if the relationship with God could be maintained; the high priest had the great honor and heavy burden of seeking God’s mercy for all Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The special clothing worn by the high priest was symbolic of the nature and importance of his office; although all the symbolism cannot be determined, some of it is made clear in the biblical text. There are three particular themes in the symbolism. The first is beauty. The sense of beauty emerges from the quality and design of all the items of clothing, together with the use of color and precious stones. But beauty is dominant in the breastplate; the Hebrew word translated approximately as “breastplate” has as its basic sense “beauty” or “excellence.” The clothing symbolizes beauty, while beauty describes the office; the two other themes associated with the symbolism bring out the excellence of the office.<\/p>\n<p>The second theme is the role of the priest as representative of Israel before God. This essential dimension of the office of the high priest is explicitly identified in the names of the tribes of Israel in the two onyx stones in the ephod, and in the 12 precious stones attached to the breastplate. The high priest entered God’s presence to seek deliverance from God’s judgment (the breastplate is identified with judgment; Ex 28:15) for his people and in order to keep the people constantly in God’s remembrance (v 12), as symbolized by the two onyx stones. The third theme is the role of high priest as the representative of God to Israel. This dimension of the office is seen in the Urim and Thummim, kept in the breastpiece, by means of which God made known his will to Israel. The high priest, Aaron, fully robed, was a splendid figure, and the splendor of his garments indicated the magnificence of the office with which he had been entrusted.<\/p>\n<p>The high priesthood was to be passed on within the family (for the high priest was expected to be a married man), although in later history the practice was not always adhered to. On Aaron’s death, the office passed to Eleazar, one of his four sons.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePriests\">The Priests<\/p>\n<p>Priests took office not as the result of a particular vocation but by virtue of priestly descent. Thus the first priests were the four sons of Aaron: Nadab, Abihu, Eleazar, and Ithamar. These four were ordained at the same time that Aaron was ordained high priest (Ex 28:1). Like him, they had special clothing, which was basically similar, though it lacked the distinctive garments of the high priest (the special ephod, the breastpiece, and the crown). The priesthood would be passed down through their sons.<\/p>\n<p>The sanctity of the priestly office was such that it was preserved from degeneration through specific laws. A man must be a descendant of Aaron to be a priest, but he was also required to meet a variety of other qualifications. He would not marry a divorcée or a former prostitute (Lv 21:7). If he was afflicted by certain kinds of disease or congenital defects, he was barred from priestly office (e.g., blindness, lameness, mutilation, being a hunchback or dwarf; vv 16-23). The principle involved was similar to that applying to animals used in sacrifice—only those free from defect or blemish were suitable for divine service.<\/p>\n<p>In the earliest days of the priesthood there is some information provided in the biblical text concerning the specific duties of the priests. Eleazar had overall responsibility for the tabernacle and its offerings (Nm 4:16); assisted Moses in a number of duties, such as numbering the people and dividing the land (26:1-2; 32:2); and later served as an adviser to Joshua. Ithamar was responsible for the construction of the tabernacle (Ex 38:21) and supervised the families of the Gershonites and Merarites (Nm 4:28-33). Nadab and Abihu, however, died soon after their ordination as a result of a sinful act in their priestly duties (Lv 10:1-7), which may have been related in part to drunkenness (vv 8-9).<\/p>\n<p>Priestly duties, in general, fell into three areas (Dt 33:8-10). First, priests were responsible, in conjunction with the high priest, for declaring God’s will to the people. Second, they had responsibilities in religious education; they were to teach to Israel God’s ordinances and law (v 10). Third, they were to be the servants of the tabernacle, participating in Israel’s sacrifices and worship. There were a number of other duties that may have fallen to them, which they would have shared with the Levites in general.<\/p>\n<p>The priests, along with all other Levites, did not own any land, as did the other Israelite tribes. Their task was to be entirely in the direct service to God. The absence of land, however, meant that they could not support and feed themselves as could other men and women. Consequently, the law specified that they could be supported for their services by the people as a whole. They were to receive, from worshipers, portions of animals that were brought to the tabernacle, as well as corn, wine, oil, and wool.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheLevites\">The Levites<\/p>\n<p>This term includes the priests, in a broad sense, for the sons of Aaron belonged to the tribe of Levi. For practical purposes, however, the Levites were those of the tribe other than the priests. The Levites also functioned in the service of the tabernacle, though they had a subordinate position. They, too, were professional men and were paid in money and in kind for their services. Though they did not inherit tribal territory of their own, there were a number of cities set aside for their use (Nm 35:1-8), and pasturelands were designated outside those cities for their livestock.<\/p>\n<p>The Levites were divided into three principal families, the descendants of Kohath, Gershon, and Merari (Nm 4). Each of these families had particular responsibilities with respect to the care and transport of the tabernacle. The sons of Kohath carried the tabernacle furniture (after it had been covered by the priests), the sons of Gershon cared for the coverings and screens, and the sons of Merari carried and erected the tabernacle’s frame. The priests, by contrast, were responsible for the transportation of the ark of the covenant. The role of each Levite, as servant of the tabernacle, was restricted; he undertook his professional duties between the ages of 25 and 50 (8:24-26).<\/p>\n<p>Although many of the duties of the Levites were of a mundane nature, they also had a very significant religious role. The law required that all the firstborn, including firstborn sons, be given to God, recalling the slaying of the firstborn at the exodus from Egypt. The Levites’ role in religion was that of being accepted by God in the place of the firstborn sons of Israel (Nm 3:11-13); their cattle, too, were accepted in place of the Israelites’ firstborn cattle. In the census taken in the time of Moses, the firstborn Israelites exceeded the number of the Levites, and a five-shekel redemption fee had to be paid into the priestly coffers for each person in excess (vv 40-51). The representative and substitutionary nature of the Levites can be seen in Israelite religion. Like the priests, they played a part in the larger activity of mediation between God and Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The law of Deuteronomy specifies a number of duties that may have fallen upon both priests and Levites (though the texts are ambiguous). These duties included participation in the activity of the law courts as judges, perhaps with special reference to religious crimes (Dt 17:8-9), taking care of the Book of the Law (v 18), controlling the lives and health of lepers (24:8), and participating directly in the conduct of covenant renewal ceremonies (27:9).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheHistoryoftheInstitution\">The History of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>In theory, the covenant law of Moses determined the nature and course of the offices of priests and Levites for the future history of Israel. In practice, however, changing historical circumstances and changes in the shape of Israel’s religion and culture altered the shape of the priesthood and the role of the Levites from time to time. And even more significantly, the persons who held the offices shaped them and their effectiveness through their faithfulness or unfaithfulness.<\/p>\n<h5>The Priesthood before the Monarchy<\/h5>\n<p>In the time of Joshua, the priests continued to undertake their important task of carrying the ark of the covenant. The Levites assisted in the division and allocation of the newly acquired land among the Israelite tribes. In Joshua 21, there is a detailed list of the allocation of cities to both priests and Levites, in fulfillment of the earlier legislation. In the days of the settlement, beyond the Conquest, there is some evidence that the Levites took over the priestly duty of transporting the ark (1 Sm 6:15; 2 Sm 15:24).<\/p>\n<p>The writer of the book of Judges has recorded two stories that illuminate the lives of particular Levites. The first, the story of Micah (Jgs 17–18), describes the establishment of a local shrine in which Micah’s son was appointed as a priest (though he was not of Levite or Aaronic descent). Later, Micah hired an itinerant Levite to function as a priest in his shrine, though subsequently that Levite was persuaded to serve the tribe of Dan as a priest. It is difficult to fit the details of this story into the theoretical model of priests and Levites, though the story may illustrate the confused state of Israel’s religion at the time. What is particularly significant is that the role of the Levite-priest was primarily oracular (18:5-6). The second story in Judges is the rather horrifying account of a Levite and his concubine (ch 19). The story illustrates the moral decline and lack of law and order in Israel at the time, but it sheds little light on the role of the Levites.<\/p>\n<p>More information is provided about the priesthood during the 11th century <span>BC<\/span>, immediately before the establishment of the monarchy. The tabernacle (by now probably a semipermanent structure) and the ark of the covenant were located in Shiloh. The priest in charge of the sanctuary in Shiloh was Eli, who may have been a descendant of Aaron’s son Ithamar. His two sons, Hophni and Phinehas, also served as priests, indicating that the principle of family descent was still operative with respect to the priesthood. But although Eli was a faithful priest, his two sons abused the office.<\/p>\n<p>The precise role of Samuel in this period is unclear. He was primarily a judge and a prophet, but it is difficult to determine whether he was also a priest. In the historical narrative, he is not called a priest, though Psalm 99:6 might be interpreted to indicate his priestly office. There are a number of passages, however, that indicate he acted like a priest. For example, he offered sacrifices (1 Sm 7:9-10); as a young man he served in the sanctuary of Shiloh and wore an ephod (ch 2). Furthermore, one of the biblical genealogies implies priestly descent (1 Chr 6:23-30). Nevertheless, he is not normally identified as a priest and the introduction to his story refers to him as an Ephraimite, by descent from his father (1 Sm 1:1), not a Levite. If the priest is perceived as a permanent servant of the sanctuary, as was Eli, then it is clear that Samuel was not a priest. But the priestly role of Samuel may perhaps be related to the fact that his mother “lent” him to God (v 28) while he was still a boy.<\/p>\n<h5>The Priesthood during the Time of David and Solomon<\/h5>\n<p>Several radical changes took place during the reign of David and Solomon. These were a result, primarily, of the establishment of a permanent temple in Jerusalem and the installation of the ark of the covenant there. During the time of Saul, the first king of Israel, the social structure was essentially the same as it had been in the time of the judges. Saul, as king, was a military leader, but his relationship to religion and the priesthood was not clearly determined.<\/p>\n<p>David changed the situation in many important respects. After his capture of the city of Jerusalem, he made that place the political and religious capital of his nation. The religious centrality of Jerusalem was assured by moving the ark of the covenant there, together with the tabernacle. Jerusalem now became the permanent location of the ark, and therefore the permanent center of religion; at the same time, the various regional shrines, which had developed in the premonarchical period, were gradually eliminated.<\/p>\n<p>These changes had numerous implications for the priesthood and the Levites. During David’s reign, there were two principal priests, Abiathar and Zadok. Abiathar, a former priest of Nob, had joined David before his rise to power; he appears to have been a descendant of Eli, and through him of Ithamar, one of Aaron’s sons. Zadok’s background is less clear, though his lineage appears to go back to Aaron’s other son, Eleazar. These two priests are always named together in the texts describing David’s reign, and Zadok is always mentioned before Abiathar. Although neither is explicitly identified as high priest in the ancient texts, there is some evidence to suggest that Abiathar functioned as high priest (1 Kgs 2:35); in NT times, he is identified as such (Mk 2:26). Zadok, during David’s reign, may have been particularly responsible for the care of the ark of the covenant (2 Sm 15:24-25). These two priests had a significant position in David’s royal establishment; they may also have shared overall responsibility for the priests, whose lives were now centered on the Jerusalem temple.<\/p>\n<p>Much of David’s time was focused upon the preparations for building a permanent temple for God. In the preparation for the temple, and in its completion during the reign of King Solomon, the new activities of the Levites may be seen. (The construction of a permanent temple automatically removed their former responsibilities related to the care and transportation of the tabernacle.) Large numbers of Levites were employed as laborers in the actual building of the temple. Others found new tasks in the worship of God in the tabernacle during David’s reign and in the temple upon its completion. To the Levites, and especially to Heman, Asaph, and Ethan, was given primary responsibility for the music of worship; this involved not only singing but also the playing of a variety of instruments in the temple’s orchestra or band. The Levites had also a variety of other tasks; they worked as gatekeepers at the sanctuary, assisted the priests in the preparation of sacrifices, kept the sanctuary clean, and functioned as general administrative and legal officers (1 Chr 23:1-32). Other Levites functioned as bankers, with primary responsibility for the temple treasuries (26:20-28).<\/p>\n<p>Following David’s death, there was a dispute over the royal succession, from which Solomon emerged as the new king. During his reign, the temple was brought to its completion and the regular worship of the nation was conducted there. In the matter of succession, however, Abiathar had supported a losing candidate, and when Solomon was made king, he lost his important office in the royal court. During Solomon’s reign, the control of the priesthood passed into the hands of Zadok.<\/p>\n<h5>The Priesthood during the Divided Monarchy<\/h5>\n<p>The great empire, which had been built by David and maintained by Solomon, collapsed after Solomon’s death. From the ruins, two new and relatively insignificant states emerged. The southern kingdom, Judah, retained Jerusalem as its capital and the temple as its center of worship. The northern kingdom, Israel, located its first capital at Shechem, from where it was later moved to Tirzah.<\/p>\n<p>In the southern state of Judah, the priests and Levites continued to function normally within the Jerusalem temple. The office of high priest continued to be passed on by descent within the family of Zadok, who had held office in Solomon’s reign. The continuity of office in this family was to be retained down into the time of the second temple, when the Zadokite succession was interrupted about 171 <span>BC<\/span>. Nevertheless, for all the continuity of religion in Jerusalem, all was not well with religion in Judah, neither during the reign of its first king, Rehoboam, nor during the reigns of his successors. During Rehoboam’s reign, there was a decline in religion and also in the priesthood, when popular forms of religion were introduced as a result of foreign influence (1 Kgs 14:22-24). The history of the southern kingdom was marked by periods of religious decline followed by reform, often as a result of the activities of the prophets. The role of the priesthood was all too rarely one of spiritual leadership, and the priests themselves were often the subject of criticism by the prophets (e.g., Jer 2:8, 26).<\/p>\n<p>The northern kingdom, whose first king was Jeroboam I, inevitably had to introduce some radical changes in religion. Jeroboam could not recognize the temple of Jerusalem, partly because it lay outside his state and partly because it was intimately associated with the royal line of David. Jeroboam established two principal shrines in his kingdom, both of which were to retain importance during the relatively short life of the northern kingdom (200 years). The first was at Bethel, in the southern part of his kingdom near the border of Judah (it was only about 12 miles, or 19.3 kilometers, north of Jerusalem). The second shrine, or sanctuary, was at Dan, in the far northern part of his kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>Both these sanctuaries had ancient associations with the Hebrew traditions. Bethel is referred to as early as the time of Abram (Gn 12:8), and the sanctuary at Dan is known from the history of the judges (Jgs 18). There may indeed have been priests and Levites still residing in these two places, descendants of the former servants of the sanctuaries. But Jeroboam established a non-Levitical priesthood to serve in these sanctuaries and in various smaller shrines or “high places,” thereby cutting off the religious tradition of the northern state even more radically from that of Judah. The royal sanctuary at Bethel, so close to the Jerusalem temple, may have been set up in deliberate competition with the Judean sanctuary.<\/p>\n<p>The history of the priesthood in the northern kingdom is no more impressive than that of Judah. Many of the prophets, including Amos, Hosea, and Jeremiah, condemned the northern sanctuaries and their priests. Hosea was forceful in his condemnation: “As marauders lie in ambush for a man, so do bands of priests; they murder on the road to Shechem, committing shameful crimes” (Hos 6:9, <span>niv<\/span>). Those to whom the spiritual lives of the chosen people had been entrusted only rarely lived up to their responsibilities.<\/p>\n<h5>Priests and Levites during and after the Exile<\/h5>\n<p>The northern kingdom came to its end in 722 <span>BC<\/span>, defeated by the armies of Assyria, but religious life continued in Judah for a while longer. Eventually, the end of the southern state came about 586 <span>BC<\/span>; the defeat of the state by the Babylonians was accompanied by the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple (Lam 2:20). The Babylonian commander took Seraiah, the high priest, and Zephaniah, his assistant, to Riblah, where, along with other officials, they were executed (2 Kgs 25:18-21). Then a policy of exile was established by the Babylonians; the most important and influential people of Judah were deported to Babylon, while the less significant were allowed to remain, for they were unlikely to cause trouble. Of those exiled from Judah, many may have been priests (Jer 29:1), for they were men of influence. By way of contrast, it seems likely that a much smaller number of Levites was exiled, reflecting perhaps their inferior social position.<\/p>\n<p>In the city of Jerusalem there was little normal religious life during the years of the exile; the altar had been destroyed and was not restored until after the exile. No doubt some kind of activity continued, but it was an impoverished form of religion. Most of the priests were in exile in Babylon, but they could not function, for there was no temple or sanctuary. Ezekiel implies that God himself was the only “sanctuary” for the exiles (Ez 11:16). Not until the return from exile and the restoration of Jerusalem and its temple could the normal functions of priests and Levites resume.<\/p>\n<p>When the Babylonian Empire was defeated, the new Persian conquerors instituted a policy whereby the Hebrew exiles could return to their homeland. Of those returning, 4,289 are designated as priests and members of priestly families, while only 341 were Levites (Ezr 2:36-42); the imbalance probably reflects the imbalance in the number of those exiled initially. Under Joshua (Jeshua), the priest, and Zerubbabel, work began on the restoration. The priests played a significant role in the first year of the return, in the restoration of the altar in Jerusalem, so that sacrifice and worship to God could resume. Once the altar had been restored, the work began on the temple itself in the second year of the return. In this work, both the priests and the Levites were involved, and the laying of new foundations for the temple began. When the foundation had been laid, both priests, in their vestments, and Levites, in their role as singers and musicians, participated in the ceremony of dedication (3:8-13). Again, when the temple had been rebuilt, both priests and Levites participated in the ceremony of dedication (6:16-18). The restoration, however, was concerned with more than buildings; it also involved a moral and religious component. Though priests and Levites helped in this task, they were also affected by it. Many, for example, had married foreign wives (9:1), and thus had to conform to Ezra’s reform laws.<\/p>\n<p>To some extent, the priests and Levites resumed their normal duties in the worship of the postexilic period. The priests were engaged in the conduct of the temple worship. The Levites assisted, as temple servants (Neh 11:3), as treasurers and collectors of tithes (10:37-39), and as instructors or teachers of the law of God (8:7-9). Nevertheless, the history of the priesthood after the exile is not free of blemish. Condemnation of the abuses of the priestly office was delivered by the prophet Malachi (Mal 1:6–2:9). Malachi catalogues a list of priestly evils reminiscent of the evil priests who lived during the time of the monarchy.<\/p>\n<p>The office of high priest continued after the exile among the descendants of Zadok, being held first by Joshua (Hg 1:1). The different political circumstances, however, changed the nature of the high priestly office. Whereas in the days of the monarchy the high priest was subservient to the king, there was no king, in the proper sense, after the exile. From a political perspective, the Jews were members of a province or colony; for practical purposes, they were a community based upon a common religion. The high priest was no longer subject to the secular authority of a Jewish king, but his religious authority was considerable, and in some ways his functions were similar to those of a king in preexilic times.<\/p>\n<h5>The Priesthood in the Maccabean Period<\/h5>\n<p>During the second century <span>BC<\/span>, some changes took place in the priesthood, particularly with respect to the office of high priest, which marked the end of the OT era and set the background for the NT period. Judea, in the second century, was ruled by the Seleucid kings, who had inherited a portion of the massive Greek Empire established by Alexander the Great. The Judean province was controlled internally under the high priesthood, whose authority was received from the Seleucid kings.<\/p>\n<p>For the first three decades of the second century <span>BC<\/span>, the high priesthood remained with the Zadokite line of descent. The high priests were members of the (Zadokite) Oniad family: first, Onias III (198–174 <span>BC<\/span>); then Jason, brother of Onias III (174–171 <span>BC<\/span>). It was in the period of Jason that there began a series of events that would terminate the Zadokite tradition.<\/p>\n<p>Onias III had opposed the Hellenization policy of Antiochus IV (Epiphanes), which threatened to undermine the Jewish faith. Antiochus replaced Onias by Jason, who in effect purchased the high priesthood from the Seleucid king. In purchasing the priestly office, Jason had set a dangerous precedent; although he was of Zadokite descent, his act implied that the office could be bought and that descent was not vital. The opponents of Jason, the Tobiads, were able to remove him from office and have their own candidate, Menelaus (who was not a Zadokite), appointed in his place. This act resulted in a civil war between those supporting Jason and those supporting Menelaus, and the war in turn culminated in ruthless repressive measures by Antiochus Epiphanes; there were massacres in Jerusalem, and the temple was desecrated (167 <span>BC<\/span>). The desecration of the temple led to the Maccabean revolt, as a result of which the Jews regained their independence for a short time. Menelaus retained the office of high priest until 161 <span>BC<\/span> and was succeeded by Alcimus (161–159 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>There then followed a period during which there was no high priest for seven years. The political climate, however, was such that it became unlikely that the Zadokite line would ever regain the high priesthood, which had been established in the time of King Solomon. The Maccabean Jonathan gained control of Jerusalem, and in 152 <span>BC<\/span>, with the approval of the Seleucid king, he was formally invested with the high priest’s robes of office. He was succeeded as high priest and ruler by his brother Simon in 143 <span>BC<\/span>, who also held the office with the approval of the Seleucids (Demetrius II). But in the third year of his reign (140 <span>BC<\/span>), the high priesthood of Simon received public approval in a great religious assembly, and the family of Simon became “high priest forever” (1 Macc 14:41-47). That event marked the real termination of the Zadokite tradition and the foundation of the Hasmonean line.<\/p>\n<p>The establishment of the high priestly office outside the Zadokite line did not go without challenge. It is probable that a sect within Judaism, now known as the Essenes, was born in reaction to the high priesthood of Simon. The Essenes (better known for the Dead Sea Scrolls) appear to have been founded by a Zadokite priest who rejected the authenticity and authority of Simon. Thus, in a limited sense, the Zadokite priests continued to survive.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePriesthoodinNewTestamentTimes\">The Priesthood in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>In the early NT period, both priests and Levites continued to function within the Jewish religion. Zechariah, father of John the Baptist, was a priest belonging to the division of Abijah (Lk 1:5), and his wife was also of priestly descent. When Zechariah was visited by an angel, he was engaged at the time in priestly duties in the Jerusalem temple—various divisions of priests took responsibility for the temple services for a period of time and then returned to their homes (v 23), as another division took over. The distinction between priests and Levites is also maintained in the NT (Jn 1:19) and appears in Jesus’ parable concerning the Good Samaritan (Lk 10:31-32). Both priests and Levites were among the earliest converts to Christianity; Barnabas was a Levite from Cyprus (Acts 4:36), and several priests responded to the proclamation of the gospel (6:7).<\/p>\n<p>The office of high priest is frequently referred to in the NT. Several high priests are named, the plurality of current and former holders of the office reflecting the nature of the position as an essentially political appointment (as distinct from its oldest definition, that of an office passing from father to son on the death of the father). The two most significant high priests in the NT are those who held office during the lifetime of Jesus. Annas was high priest about <span>AD<\/span> 6 to 15, but even after he ceased to hold the office formally, he continued to exert considerable influence through his son-in-law, the high priest Caiaphas (c. <span>AD<\/span> 18–36). Both were significant figures in the trial of Jesus. At a later date, Ananias, son of Nedebaeus, was high priest (c. <span>AD<\/span> 47–58) and president of the Sanhedrin during the time in which Paul was brought to trial.<\/p>\n<p>The priesthood held considerable authority in NT times. Most internal and religious matters in the Roman province of Judea were within the authority of the Sanhedrin, which functioned as a kind of provincial government, though its powers were limited in certain matters by Rome. Its membership included the ruling and former high priests and a large number of Sadducees, many of whom belonged to influential priestly families. This priestly influence in the Sanhedrin was indicative of the important role of the temple in Jewish life during the first century <span>AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>In <span>AD<\/span> 70, following the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem, a radical change came about in the significance of the priesthood in Judaism. The end of the temple removed in effect the purpose for the existence of the priesthood. Although the priesthood continued after a fashion until the Bar-Kochba rebellion in <span>AD<\/span> 135, its days were numbered after <span>AD<\/span> 70. Since the end of the first century <span>AD<\/span>, Judaism has developed without priests, and its course down to the present century has been charted by the rabbis, the spiritual descendants of the Pharisees.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Priesthood.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PRIESTS AND LEVITES<\/h3>\n<p>Servants of God in the OT. There were three basic classes of religious personnel in ancient Israel: prophets, wise men, and priests and Levites. The classical prophets fulfilled a vocation but were not professionals; they were not paid for their task and functioned only in response to the particular call of God. The wise men were involved in government and education; some of their duties were secular, though they were also involved in moral education. The priests and Levites fulfilled a variety of essentially religious duties and were equivalent approximately to the clergy in modern times. They were professional men and were supported for their full-time religious work.<\/p>\n<p>The role of the priesthood may be seen most clearly in the context of Israelite religion as a whole. At the heart of religion was a relationship with God; to be an Israelite or a Jew was to know and maintain a continuous relationship with the living God. This relationship found its outward expression in a variety of contexts: the covenant, the temple, worship, and every facet of daily life. Thus religion, understood as a relationship, had two perspectives: the relationship with God and that with fellow human beings. It had both a personal and a communal dimension to it. The priests were the guardians and servants of this life of relationship, which was at the heart of OT religion; all their functions can best be understood within the context of a relationship between God and Israel. The prophets, too, were servants of the covenant relationship. While the priests functioned as the normal servants of religion, the prophets’ role was more that of calling a delinquent people back to the relationship with God in times of crisis.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, there are frequent references to both priests and Levites; in a number of biblical texts, however, the distinction is not clear (see, e.g., Dt 18:1-8). From the scholarly point of view, the precise relationship between priests and Levites is a continuing problem that has not yet been fully resolved. In general terms, only the sons of Aaron were to assume the role of priests; all other Levites would have religious functions, though technically they would not be priests. While this distinction is clear in most biblical texts, in others there is lack of certainty and clarity. It is clear, however, that <em>priests<\/em> (Levites descended from Aaron) and <em>Levites<\/em> (other than the descendants of Aaron) all had professional religious duties to perform. The precise nature of those duties varied from time to time in the course of Israel’s history.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Origins of the Priesthood<\/p>\n<p>• The High Priest<\/p>\n<p>• The Priests<\/p>\n<p>• The Levites<\/p>\n<p>• The History of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Priesthood in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheOriginsofthePriesthood\">The Origins of the Priesthood<\/p>\n<p>The priesthood in Israel began during the time of Moses and Aaron. The exodus from Egypt was not only the liberation of a group of Hebrew slaves but also the birth of the nation of Israel. The nation that was born in the exodus was given its constitution in the covenant of Sinai. The law of this covenant established the foundations and origins of Israelite priesthood. It provides insight into the three basic categories to be considered: the high priest, the priests, and the Levites.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheHighPriest\">The High Priest<\/p>\n<p>Any large and complex organization requires a head or leader, and this was true also of the Hebrew priesthood (though in its early days it was a small organization). The covenant was established through Moses, the prophet, through whom God gave the offer and substance of the covenant relationship; religious life within the covenant was to be the primary responsibility of Aaron, who was the first and chief priest.<\/p>\n<p>In the earliest days of Israel’s priesthood, it is probable that the high priest’s office was relatively informal; he was chief or leader among his fellow priests. The office was significant, nevertheless, and involved a special ritual of investiture, special clothing, and certain special responsibilities. While the high priest’s duties were similar in principle to those of other priests, he had certain exclusive responsibilities. To some extent, his duties were administrative, pertaining to all the priests of whom he had charge. But his position was more weighty than that of an administrator; just as all priests were the servants and guardians of the covenant relationship, so the high priest was chief servant and chief guardian. In his hands rested spiritual responsibility for the entire people of God, and therein lay the true honor and gravity of his position.<\/p>\n\n<p>This spiritual seniority of the high priest is seen most clearly in certain tasks he undertook within Israel’s life of worship. The clearest example may be seen in the annual observation of the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur). On that day alone, the high priest entered the Holy of Holies and, standing before the “mercy seat,” he sought God’s forgiveness and mercy for the whole nation of Israel (Lv 16:1-19). It is in that ceremony that Israel’s covenant faith is seen most clearly. Israel’s religion was one of relationship with a holy God, and human evil disrupted that relationship. While all worship and sacrifices throughout the year were concerned with the continuation of the relationship, the Day of Atonement was the most solemn day of the year, in which the attention of all the people focused upon the meaning of their existence. Life held meaning only if the relationship with God could be maintained; the high priest had the great honor and heavy burden of seeking God’s mercy for all Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The special clothing worn by the high priest was symbolic of the nature and importance of his office; although all the symbolism cannot be determined, some of it is made clear in the biblical text. There are three particular themes in the symbolism. The first is beauty. The sense of beauty emerges from the quality and design of all the items of clothing, together with the use of color and precious stones. But beauty is dominant in the breastplate; the Hebrew word translated approximately as “breastplate” has as its basic sense “beauty” or “excellence.” The clothing symbolizes beauty, while beauty describes the office; the two other themes associated with the symbolism bring out the excellence of the office.<\/p>\n<p>The second theme is the role of the priest as representative of Israel before God. This essential dimension of the office of the high priest is explicitly identified in the names of the tribes of Israel in the two onyx stones in the ephod, and in the 12 precious stones attached to the breastplate. The high priest entered God’s presence to seek deliverance from God’s judgment (the breastplate is identified with judgment; Ex 28:15) for his people and in order to keep the people constantly in God’s remembrance (v 12), as symbolized by the two onyx stones. The third theme is the role of high priest as the representative of God to Israel. This dimension of the office is seen in the Urim and Thummim, kept in the breastpiece, by means of which God made known his will to Israel. The high priest, Aaron, fully robed, was a splendid figure, and the splendor of his garments indicated the magnificence of the office with which he had been entrusted.<\/p>\n<p>The high priesthood was to be passed on within the family (for the high priest was expected to be a married man), although in later history the practice was not always adhered to. On Aaron’s death, the office passed to Eleazar, one of his four sons.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePriests\">The Priests<\/p>\n<p>Priests took office not as the result of a particular vocation but by virtue of priestly descent. Thus the first priests were the four sons of Aaron: Nadab, Abihu, Eleazar, and Ithamar. These four were ordained at the same time that Aaron was ordained high priest (Ex 28:1). Like him, they had special clothing, which was basically similar, though it lacked the distinctive garments of the high priest (the special ephod, the breastpiece, and the crown). The priesthood would be passed down through their sons.<\/p>\n<p>The sanctity of the priestly office was such that it was preserved from degeneration through specific laws. A man must be a descendant of Aaron to be a priest, but he was also required to meet a variety of other qualifications. He would not marry a divorcée or a former prostitute (Lv 21:7). If he was afflicted by certain kinds of disease or congenital defects, he was barred from priestly office (e.g., blindness, lameness, mutilation, being a hunchback or dwarf; vv 16-23). The principle involved was similar to that applying to animals used in sacrifice—only those free from defect or blemish were suitable for divine service.<\/p>\n<p>In the earliest days of the priesthood there is some information provided in the biblical text concerning the specific duties of the priests. Eleazar had overall responsibility for the tabernacle and its offerings (Nm 4:16); assisted Moses in a number of duties, such as numbering the people and dividing the land (26:1-2; 32:2); and later served as an adviser to Joshua. Ithamar was responsible for the construction of the tabernacle (Ex 38:21) and supervised the families of the Gershonites and Merarites (Nm 4:28-33). Nadab and Abihu, however, died soon after their ordination as a result of a sinful act in their priestly duties (Lv 10:1-7), which may have been related in part to drunkenness (vv 8-9).<\/p>\n<p>Priestly duties, in general, fell into three areas (Dt 33:8-10). First, priests were responsible, in conjunction with the high priest, for declaring God’s will to the people. Second, they had responsibilities in religious education; they were to teach to Israel God’s ordinances and law (v 10). Third, they were to be the servants of the tabernacle, participating in Israel’s sacrifices and worship. There were a number of other duties that may have fallen to them, which they would have shared with the Levites in general.<\/p>\n<p>The priests, along with all other Levites, did not own any land, as did the other Israelite tribes. Their task was to be entirely in the direct service to God. The absence of land, however, meant that they could not support and feed themselves as could other men and women. Consequently, the law specified that they could be supported for their services by the people as a whole. They were to receive, from worshipers, portions of animals that were brought to the tabernacle, as well as corn, wine, oil, and wool.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheLevites\">The Levites<\/p>\n<p>This term includes the priests, in a broad sense, for the sons of Aaron belonged to the tribe of Levi. For practical purposes, however, the Levites were those of the tribe other than the priests. The Levites also functioned in the service of the tabernacle, though they had a subordinate position. They, too, were professional men and were paid in money and in kind for their services. Though they did not inherit tribal territory of their own, there were a number of cities set aside for their use (Nm 35:1-8), and pasturelands were designated outside those cities for their livestock.<\/p>\n<p>The Levites were divided into three principal families, the descendants of Kohath, Gershon, and Merari (Nm 4). Each of these families had particular responsibilities with respect to the care and transport of the tabernacle. The sons of Kohath carried the tabernacle furniture (after it had been covered by the priests), the sons of Gershon cared for the coverings and screens, and the sons of Merari carried and erected the tabernacle’s frame. The priests, by contrast, were responsible for the transportation of the ark of the covenant. The role of each Levite, as servant of the tabernacle, was restricted; he undertook his professional duties between the ages of 25 and 50 (8:24-26).<\/p>\n<p>Although many of the duties of the Levites were of a mundane nature, they also had a very significant religious role. The law required that all the firstborn, including firstborn sons, be given to God, recalling the slaying of the firstborn at the exodus from Egypt. The Levites’ role in religion was that of being accepted by God in the place of the firstborn sons of Israel (Nm 3:11-13); their cattle, too, were accepted in place of the Israelites’ firstborn cattle. In the census taken in the time of Moses, the firstborn Israelites exceeded the number of the Levites, and a five-shekel redemption fee had to be paid into the priestly coffers for each person in excess (vv 40-51). The representative and substitutionary nature of the Levites can be seen in Israelite religion. Like the priests, they played a part in the larger activity of mediation between God and Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The law of Deuteronomy specifies a number of duties that may have fallen upon both priests and Levites (though the texts are ambiguous). These duties included participation in the activity of the law courts as judges, perhaps with special reference to religious crimes (Dt 17:8-9), taking care of the Book of the Law (v 18), controlling the lives and health of lepers (24:8), and participating directly in the conduct of covenant renewal ceremonies (27:9).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheHistoryoftheInstitution\">The History of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>In theory, the covenant law of Moses determined the nature and course of the offices of priests and Levites for the future history of Israel. In practice, however, changing historical circumstances and changes in the shape of Israel’s religion and culture altered the shape of the priesthood and the role of the Levites from time to time. And even more significantly, the persons who held the offices shaped them and their effectiveness through their faithfulness or unfaithfulness.<\/p>\n<h5>The Priesthood before the Monarchy<\/h5>\n<p>In the time of Joshua, the priests continued to undertake their important task of carrying the ark of the covenant. The Levites assisted in the division and allocation of the newly acquired land among the Israelite tribes. In Joshua 21, there is a detailed list of the allocation of cities to both priests and Levites, in fulfillment of the earlier legislation. In the days of the settlement, beyond the Conquest, there is some evidence that the Levites took over the priestly duty of transporting the ark (1 Sm 6:15; 2 Sm 15:24).<\/p>\n<p>The writer of the book of Judges has recorded two stories that illuminate the lives of particular Levites. The first, the story of Micah (Jgs 17–18), describes the establishment of a local shrine in which Micah’s son was appointed as a priest (though he was not of Levite or Aaronic descent). Later, Micah hired an itinerant Levite to function as a priest in his shrine, though subsequently that Levite was persuaded to serve the tribe of Dan as a priest. It is difficult to fit the details of this story into the theoretical model of priests and Levites, though the story may illustrate the confused state of Israel’s religion at the time. What is particularly significant is that the role of the Levite-priest was primarily oracular (18:5-6). The second story in Judges is the rather horrifying account of a Levite and his concubine (ch 19). The story illustrates the moral decline and lack of law and order in Israel at the time, but it sheds little light on the role of the Levites.<\/p>\n<p>More information is provided about the priesthood during the 11th century <span>BC<\/span>, immediately before the establishment of the monarchy. The tabernacle (by now probably a semipermanent structure) and the ark of the covenant were located in Shiloh. The priest in charge of the sanctuary in Shiloh was Eli, who may have been a descendant of Aaron’s son Ithamar. His two sons, Hophni and Phinehas, also served as priests, indicating that the principle of family descent was still operative with respect to the priesthood. But although Eli was a faithful priest, his two sons abused the office.<\/p>\n<p>The precise role of Samuel in this period is unclear. He was primarily a judge and a prophet, but it is difficult to determine whether he was also a priest. In the historical narrative, he is not called a priest, though Psalm 99:6 might be interpreted to indicate his priestly office. There are a number of passages, however, that indicate he acted like a priest. For example, he offered sacrifices (1 Sm 7:9-10); as a young man he served in the sanctuary of Shiloh and wore an ephod (ch 2). Furthermore, one of the biblical genealogies implies priestly descent (1 Chr 6:23-30). Nevertheless, he is not normally identified as a priest and the introduction to his story refers to him as an Ephraimite, by descent from his father (1 Sm 1:1), not a Levite. If the priest is perceived as a permanent servant of the sanctuary, as was Eli, then it is clear that Samuel was not a priest. But the priestly role of Samuel may perhaps be related to the fact that his mother “lent” him to God (v 28) while he was still a boy.<\/p>\n<h5>The Priesthood during the Time of David and Solomon<\/h5>\n<p>Several radical changes took place during the reign of David and Solomon. These were a result, primarily, of the establishment of a permanent temple in Jerusalem and the installation of the ark of the covenant there. During the time of Saul, the first king of Israel, the social structure was essentially the same as it had been in the time of the judges. Saul, as king, was a military leader, but his relationship to religion and the priesthood was not clearly determined.<\/p>\n<p>David changed the situation in many important respects. After his capture of the city of Jerusalem, he made that place the political and religious capital of his nation. The religious centrality of Jerusalem was assured by moving the ark of the covenant there, together with the tabernacle. Jerusalem now became the permanent location of the ark, and therefore the permanent center of religion; at the same time, the various regional shrines, which had developed in the premonarchical period, were gradually eliminated.<\/p>\n<p>These changes had numerous implications for the priesthood and the Levites. During David’s reign, there were two principal priests, Abiathar and Zadok. Abiathar, a former priest of Nob, had joined David before his rise to power; he appears to have been a descendant of Eli, and through him of Ithamar, one of Aaron’s sons. Zadok’s background is less clear, though his lineage appears to go back to Aaron’s other son, Eleazar. These two priests are always named together in the texts describing David’s reign, and Zadok is always mentioned before Abiathar. Although neither is explicitly identified as high priest in the ancient texts, there is some evidence to suggest that Abiathar functioned as high priest (1 Kgs 2:35); in NT times, he is identified as such (Mk 2:26). Zadok, during David’s reign, may have been particularly responsible for the care of the ark of the covenant (2 Sm 15:24-25). These two priests had a significant position in David’s royal establishment; they may also have shared overall responsibility for the priests, whose lives were now centered on the Jerusalem temple.<\/p>\n<p>Much of David’s time was focused upon the preparations for building a permanent temple for God. In the preparation for the temple, and in its completion during the reign of King Solomon, the new activities of the Levites may be seen. (The construction of a permanent temple automatically removed their former responsibilities related to the care and transportation of the tabernacle.) Large numbers of Levites were employed as laborers in the actual building of the temple. Others found new tasks in the worship of God in the tabernacle during David’s reign and in the temple upon its completion. To the Levites, and especially to Heman, Asaph, and Ethan, was given primary responsibility for the music of worship; this involved not only singing but also the playing of a variety of instruments in the temple’s orchestra or band. The Levites had also a variety of other tasks; they worked as gatekeepers at the sanctuary, assisted the priests in the preparation of sacrifices, kept the sanctuary clean, and functioned as general administrative and legal officers (1 Chr 23:1-32). Other Levites functioned as bankers, with primary responsibility for the temple treasuries (26:20-28).<\/p>\n<p>Following David’s death, there was a dispute over the royal succession, from which Solomon emerged as the new king. During his reign, the temple was brought to its completion and the regular worship of the nation was conducted there. In the matter of succession, however, Abiathar had supported a losing candidate, and when Solomon was made king, he lost his important office in the royal court. During Solomon’s reign, the control of the priesthood passed into the hands of Zadok.<\/p>\n<h5>The Priesthood during the Divided Monarchy<\/h5>\n<p>The great empire, which had been built by David and maintained by Solomon, collapsed after Solomon’s death. From the ruins, two new and relatively insignificant states emerged. The southern kingdom, Judah, retained Jerusalem as its capital and the temple as its center of worship. The northern kingdom, Israel, located its first capital at Shechem, from where it was later moved to Tirzah.<\/p>\n<p>In the southern state of Judah, the priests and Levites continued to function normally within the Jerusalem temple. The office of high priest continued to be passed on by descent within the family of Zadok, who had held office in Solomon’s reign. The continuity of office in this family was to be retained down into the time of the second temple, when the Zadokite succession was interrupted about 171 <span>BC<\/span>. Nevertheless, for all the continuity of religion in Jerusalem, all was not well with religion in Judah, neither during the reign of its first king, Rehoboam, nor during the reigns of his successors. During Rehoboam’s reign, there was a decline in religion and also in the priesthood, when popular forms of religion were introduced as a result of foreign influence (1 Kgs 14:22-24). The history of the southern kingdom was marked by periods of religious decline followed by reform, often as a result of the activities of the prophets. The role of the priesthood was all too rarely one of spiritual leadership, and the priests themselves were often the subject of criticism by the prophets (e.g., Jer 2:8, 26).<\/p>\n<p>The northern kingdom, whose first king was Jeroboam I, inevitably had to introduce some radical changes in religion. Jeroboam could not recognize the temple of Jerusalem, partly because it lay outside his state and partly because it was intimately associated with the royal line of David. Jeroboam established two principal shrines in his kingdom, both of which were to retain importance during the relatively short life of the northern kingdom (200 years). The first was at Bethel, in the southern part of his kingdom near the border of Judah (it was only about 12 miles, or 19.3 kilometers, north of Jerusalem). The second shrine, or sanctuary, was at Dan, in the far northern part of his kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>Both these sanctuaries had ancient associations with the Hebrew traditions. Bethel is referred to as early as the time of Abram (Gn 12:8), and the sanctuary at Dan is known from the history of the judges (Jgs 18). There may indeed have been priests and Levites still residing in these two places, descendants of the former servants of the sanctuaries. But Jeroboam established a non-Levitical priesthood to serve in these sanctuaries and in various smaller shrines or “high places,” thereby cutting off the religious tradition of the northern state even more radically from that of Judah. The royal sanctuary at Bethel, so close to the Jerusalem temple, may have been set up in deliberate competition with the Judean sanctuary.<\/p>\n<p>The history of the priesthood in the northern kingdom is no more impressive than that of Judah. Many of the prophets, including Amos, Hosea, and Jeremiah, condemned the northern sanctuaries and their priests. Hosea was forceful in his condemnation: “As marauders lie in ambush for a man, so do bands of priests; they murder on the road to Shechem, committing shameful crimes” (Hos 6:9, <span>niv<\/span>). Those to whom the spiritual lives of the chosen people had been entrusted only rarely lived up to their responsibilities.<\/p>\n<h5>Priests and Levites during and after the Exile<\/h5>\n<p>The northern kingdom came to its end in 722 <span>BC<\/span>, defeated by the armies of Assyria, but religious life continued in Judah for a while longer. Eventually, the end of the southern state came about 586 <span>BC<\/span>; the defeat of the state by the Babylonians was accompanied by the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple (Lam 2:20). The Babylonian commander took Seraiah, the high priest, and Zephaniah, his assistant, to Riblah, where, along with other officials, they were executed (2 Kgs 25:18-21). Then a policy of exile was established by the Babylonians; the most important and influential people of Judah were deported to Babylon, while the less significant were allowed to remain, for they were unlikely to cause trouble. Of those exiled from Judah, many may have been priests (Jer 29:1), for they were men of influence. By way of contrast, it seems likely that a much smaller number of Levites was exiled, reflecting perhaps their inferior social position.<\/p>\n<p>In the city of Jerusalem there was little normal religious life during the years of the exile; the altar had been destroyed and was not restored until after the exile. No doubt some kind of activity continued, but it was an impoverished form of religion. Most of the priests were in exile in Babylon, but they could not function, for there was no temple or sanctuary. Ezekiel implies that God himself was the only “sanctuary” for the exiles (Ez 11:16). Not until the return from exile and the restoration of Jerusalem and its temple could the normal functions of priests and Levites resume.<\/p>\n<p>When the Babylonian Empire was defeated, the new Persian conquerors instituted a policy whereby the Hebrew exiles could return to their homeland. Of those returning, 4,289 are designated as priests and members of priestly families, while only 341 were Levites (Ezr 2:36-42); the imbalance probably reflects the imbalance in the number of those exiled initially. Under Joshua (Jeshua), the priest, and Zerubbabel, work began on the restoration. The priests played a significant role in the first year of the return, in the restoration of the altar in Jerusalem, so that sacrifice and worship to God could resume. Once the altar had been restored, the work began on the temple itself in the second year of the return. In this work, both the priests and the Levites were involved, and the laying of new foundations for the temple began. When the foundation had been laid, both priests, in their vestments, and Levites, in their role as singers and musicians, participated in the ceremony of dedication (3:8-13). Again, when the temple had been rebuilt, both priests and Levites participated in the ceremony of dedication (6:16-18). The restoration, however, was concerned with more than buildings; it also involved a moral and religious component. Though priests and Levites helped in this task, they were also affected by it. Many, for example, had married foreign wives (9:1), and thus had to conform to Ezra’s reform laws.<\/p>\n<p>To some extent, the priests and Levites resumed their normal duties in the worship of the postexilic period. The priests were engaged in the conduct of the temple worship. The Levites assisted, as temple servants (Neh 11:3), as treasurers and collectors of tithes (10:37-39), and as instructors or teachers of the law of God (8:7-9). Nevertheless, the history of the priesthood after the exile is not free of blemish. Condemnation of the abuses of the priestly office was delivered by the prophet Malachi (Mal 1:6–2:9). Malachi catalogues a list of priestly evils reminiscent of the evil priests who lived during the time of the monarchy.<\/p>\n<p>The office of high priest continued after the exile among the descendants of Zadok, being held first by Joshua (Hg 1:1). The different political circumstances, however, changed the nature of the high priestly office. Whereas in the days of the monarchy the high priest was subservient to the king, there was no king, in the proper sense, after the exile. From a political perspective, the Jews were members of a province or colony; for practical purposes, they were a community based upon a common religion. The high priest was no longer subject to the secular authority of a Jewish king, but his religious authority was considerable, and in some ways his functions were similar to those of a king in preexilic times.<\/p>\n<h5>The Priesthood in the Maccabean Period<\/h5>\n<p>During the second century <span>BC<\/span>, some changes took place in the priesthood, particularly with respect to the office of high priest, which marked the end of the OT era and set the background for the NT period. Judea, in the second century, was ruled by the Seleucid kings, who had inherited a portion of the massive Greek Empire established by Alexander the Great. The Judean province was controlled internally under the high priesthood, whose authority was received from the Seleucid kings.<\/p>\n<p>For the first three decades of the second century <span>BC<\/span>, the high priesthood remained with the Zadokite line of descent. The high priests were members of the (Zadokite) Oniad family: first, Onias III (198–174 <span>BC<\/span>); then Jason, brother of Onias III (174–171 <span>BC<\/span>). It was in the period of Jason that there began a series of events that would terminate the Zadokite tradition.<\/p>\n<p>Onias III had opposed the Hellenization policy of Antiochus IV (Epiphanes), which threatened to undermine the Jewish faith. Antiochus replaced Onias by Jason, who in effect purchased the high priesthood from the Seleucid king. In purchasing the priestly office, Jason had set a dangerous precedent; although he was of Zadokite descent, his act implied that the office could be bought and that descent was not vital. The opponents of Jason, the Tobiads, were able to remove him from office and have their own candidate, Menelaus (who was not a Zadokite), appointed in his place. This act resulted in a civil war between those supporting Jason and those supporting Menelaus, and the war in turn culminated in ruthless repressive measures by Antiochus Epiphanes; there were massacres in Jerusalem, and the temple was desecrated (167 <span>BC<\/span>). The desecration of the temple led to the Maccabean revolt, as a result of which the Jews regained their independence for a short time. Menelaus retained the office of high priest until 161 <span>BC<\/span> and was succeeded by Alcimus (161–159 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>There then followed a period during which there was no high priest for seven years. The political climate, however, was such that it became unlikely that the Zadokite line would ever regain the high priesthood, which had been established in the time of King Solomon. The Maccabean Jonathan gained control of Jerusalem, and in 152 <span>BC<\/span>, with the approval of the Seleucid king, he was formally invested with the high priest’s robes of office. He was succeeded as high priest and ruler by his brother Simon in 143 <span>BC<\/span>, who also held the office with the approval of the Seleucids (Demetrius II). But in the third year of his reign (140 <span>BC<\/span>), the high priesthood of Simon received public approval in a great religious assembly, and the family of Simon became “high priest forever” (1 Macc 14:41-47). That event marked the real termination of the Zadokite tradition and the foundation of the Hasmonean line.<\/p>\n<p>The establishment of the high priestly office outside the Zadokite line did not go without challenge. It is probable that a sect within Judaism, now known as the Essenes, was born in reaction to the high priesthood of Simon. The Essenes (better known for the Dead Sea Scrolls) appear to have been founded by a Zadokite priest who rejected the authenticity and authority of Simon. Thus, in a limited sense, the Zadokite priests continued to survive.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePriesthoodinNewTestamentTimes\">The Priesthood in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>In the early NT period, both priests and Levites continued to function within the Jewish religion. Zechariah, father of John the Baptist, was a priest belonging to the division of Abijah (Lk 1:5), and his wife was also of priestly descent. When Zechariah was visited by an angel, he was engaged at the time in priestly duties in the Jerusalem temple—various divisions of priests took responsibility for the temple services for a period of time and then returned to their homes (v 23), as another division took over. The distinction between priests and Levites is also maintained in the NT (Jn 1:19) and appears in Jesus’ parable concerning the Good Samaritan (Lk 10:31-32). Both priests and Levites were among the earliest converts to Christianity; Barnabas was a Levite from Cyprus (Acts 4:36), and several priests responded to the proclamation of the gospel (6:7).<\/p>\n<p>The office of high priest is frequently referred to in the NT. Several high priests are named, the plurality of current and former holders of the office reflecting the nature of the position as an essentially political appointment (as distinct from its oldest definition, that of an office passing from father to son on the death of the father). The two most significant high priests in the NT are those who held office during the lifetime of Jesus. Annas was high priest about <span>AD<\/span> 6 to 15, but even after he ceased to hold the office formally, he continued to exert considerable influence through his son-in-law, the high priest Caiaphas (c. <span>AD<\/span> 18–36). Both were significant figures in the trial of Jesus. At a later date, Ananias, son of Nedebaeus, was high priest (c. <span>AD<\/span> 47–58) and president of the Sanhedrin during the time in which Paul was brought to trial.<\/p>\n<p>The priesthood held considerable authority in NT times. Most internal and religious matters in the Roman province of Judea were within the authority of the Sanhedrin, which functioned as a kind of provincial government, though its powers were limited in certain matters by Rome. Its membership included the ruling and former high priests and a large number of Sadducees, many of whom belonged to influential priestly families. This priestly influence in the Sanhedrin was indicative of the important role of the temple in Jewish life during the first century <span>AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>In <span>AD<\/span> 70, following the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem, a radical change came about in the significance of the priesthood in Judaism. The end of the temple removed in effect the purpose for the existence of the priesthood. Although the priesthood continued after a fashion until the Bar-Kochba rebellion in <span>AD<\/span> 135, its days were numbered after <span>AD<\/span> 70. Since the end of the first century <span>AD<\/span>, Judaism has developed without priests, and its course down to the present century has been charted by the rabbis, the spiritual descendants of the Pharisees.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Priesthood.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PRIESTS AND LEVITES Servants of God in the OT. There were three basic classes of religious personnel in ancient Israel: prophets, wise men, and priests and Levites. The classical prophets fulfilled a vocation but were not professionals; they were not paid for their task and functioned only in response to the particular call of God. The wise men were involved in government and education; some of their duties were secular, though they were also involved in moral education. The priests and Levit...","summary_en":"PRIESTS AND LEVITES Servants of God in the OT. There were three basic classes of religious personnel in ancient Israel: prophets, wise men, and priests and Levites. The classical prophets fulfilled a vocation but were not professionals; they were not paid for their task and functioned only in response to the particular call of God. The wise men were involved in government and education; some of their duties were secular, though they were also involved in moral education. The priests and Levit...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56320,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:19","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:19","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:19–12:50<\/strong> Jesus reveals himself to the world through his miraculous signs and sermons. Audiences were divided: Some wanted to believe in him; others opposed him. This division intensifies as the book unfolds. Jesus ended his public ministry with a final appeal for people to believe in him (12:44-50).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:19–12:50<\/strong> Jesus reveals himself to the world through his miraculous signs and sermons. Audiences were divided: Some wanted to believe in him; others opposed him. This division intensifies as the book unfolds. Jesus ended his public ministry with a final appeal for people to believe in him (12:44-50).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:19–12:50 Jesus reveals himself to the world through his miraculous signs and sermons. Audiences were divided: Some wanted to believe in him; others opposed him. This division intensifies as the book unfolds. Jesus ended his public ministry with a final appeal for people to believe in him (12:44-50).","summary_en":"1:19–12:50 Jesus reveals himself to the world through his miraculous signs and sermons. Audiences were divided: Some wanted to believe in him; others opposed him. This division intensifies as the book unfolds. Jesus ended his public ministry with a final appeal for people to believe in him (12:44-50).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56321,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:19","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:19","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:19-51<\/strong> John’s Gospel gives limited attention to John the Baptist compared to the synoptic Gospels (Matt 3:1-6; Mark 1:2-6; Luke 1:1-24, 57-80; 3:1-13). Yet the apostle John wants us to see that John the Baptist correctly identified and exalted Jesus. John the Baptist’s disciples leave him and follow Jesus; Jesus took over the ministry John began, increasing as John decreased (John 3:30).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:19-51<\/strong> John’s Gospel gives limited attention to John the Baptist compared to the synoptic Gospels (Matt 3:1-6; Mark 1:2-6; Luke 1:1-24, 57-80; 3:1-13). Yet the apostle John wants us to see that John the Baptist correctly identified and exalted Jesus. John the Baptist’s disciples leave him and follow Jesus; Jesus took over the ministry John began, increasing as John decreased (John 3:30).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:19-51 John’s Gospel gives limited attention to John the Baptist compared to the synoptic Gospels (Matt 3:1-6; Mark 1:2-6; Luke 1:1-24, 57-80; 3:1-13). Yet the apostle John wants us to see that John the Baptist correctly identified and exalted Jesus. John the Baptist’s disciples leave him and follow Jesus; Jesus took over the ministry John began, increasing as John decreased (John 3:30).","summary_en":"1:19-51 John’s Gospel gives limited attention to John the Baptist compared to the synoptic Gospels (Matt 3:1-6; Mark 1:2-6; Luke 1:1-24, 57-80; 3:1-13). Yet the apostle John wants us to see that John the Baptist correctly identified and exalted Jesus. John the Baptist’s disciples leave him and follow Jesus; Jesus took over the ministry John began, increasing as John decreased (John 3:30).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83946,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:19","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:19","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:19–12:50<\/strong> Jesus reveals himself to the world through his miraculous signs and sermons. Audiences were divided: Some wanted to believe in him; others opposed him. This division intensifies as the book unfolds. Jesus ended his public ministry with a final appeal for people to believe in him (12:44-50).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:19–12:50<\/strong> Jesus reveals himself to the world through his miraculous signs and sermons. Audiences were divided: Some wanted to believe in him; others opposed him. This division intensifies as the book unfolds. Jesus ended his public ministry with a final appeal for people to believe in him (12:44-50).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:19–12:50 Jesus reveals himself to the world through his miraculous signs and sermons. Audiences were divided: Some wanted to believe in him; others opposed him. This division intensifies as the book unfolds. Jesus ended his public ministry with a final appeal for people to believe in him (12:44-50).","summary_en":"1:19–12:50 Jesus reveals himself to the world through his miraculous signs and sermons. Audiences were divided: Some wanted to believe in him; others opposed him. This division intensifies as the book unfolds. Jesus ended his public ministry with a final appeal for people to believe in him (12:44-50).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83947,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:19","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:19","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:19-51<\/strong> John’s Gospel gives limited attention to John the Baptist compared to the synoptic Gospels (Matt 3:1-6; Mark 1:2-6; Luke 1:1-24, 57-80; 3:1-13). Yet the apostle John wants us to see that John the Baptist correctly identified and exalted Jesus. John the Baptist’s disciples leave him and follow Jesus; Jesus took over the ministry John began, increasing as John decreased (John 3:30).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:19-51<\/strong> John’s Gospel gives limited attention to John the Baptist compared to the synoptic Gospels (Matt 3:1-6; Mark 1:2-6; Luke 1:1-24, 57-80; 3:1-13). Yet the apostle John wants us to see that John the Baptist correctly identified and exalted Jesus. John the Baptist’s disciples leave him and follow Jesus; Jesus took over the ministry John began, increasing as John decreased (John 3:30).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:19-51 John’s Gospel gives limited attention to John the Baptist compared to the synoptic Gospels (Matt 3:1-6; Mark 1:2-6; Luke 1:1-24, 57-80; 3:1-13). Yet the apostle John wants us to see that John the Baptist correctly identified and exalted Jesus. John the Baptist’s disciples leave him and follow Jesus; Jesus took over the ministry John began, increasing as John decreased (John 3:30).","summary_en":"1:19-51 John’s Gospel gives limited attention to John the Baptist compared to the synoptic Gospels (Matt 3:1-6; Mark 1:2-6; Luke 1:1-24, 57-80; 3:1-13). Yet the apostle John wants us to see that John the Baptist correctly identified and exalted Jesus. John the Baptist’s disciples leave him and follow Jesus; Jesus took over the ministry John began, increasing as John decreased (John 3:30).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111572,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:19","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:19","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:19–12:50<\/strong> Jesus reveals himself to the world through his miraculous signs and sermons. Audiences were divided: Some wanted to believe in him; others opposed him. This division intensifies as the book unfolds. Jesus ended his public ministry with a final appeal for people to believe in him (12:44-50).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:19–12:50<\/strong> Jesus reveals himself to the world through his miraculous signs and sermons. Audiences were divided: Some wanted to believe in him; others opposed him. This division intensifies as the book unfolds. Jesus ended his public ministry with a final appeal for people to believe in him (12:44-50).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:19–12:50 Jesus reveals himself to the world through his miraculous signs and sermons. Audiences were divided: Some wanted to believe in him; others opposed him. This division intensifies as the book unfolds. Jesus ended his public ministry with a final appeal for people to believe in him (12:44-50).","summary_en":"1:19–12:50 Jesus reveals himself to the world through his miraculous signs and sermons. Audiences were divided: Some wanted to believe in him; others opposed him. This division intensifies as the book unfolds. Jesus ended his public ministry with a final appeal for people to believe in him (12:44-50).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111573,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:19","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:19","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:19-51<\/strong> John’s Gospel gives limited attention to John the Baptist compared to the synoptic Gospels (Matt 3:1-6; Mark 1:2-6; Luke 1:1-24, 57-80; 3:1-13). Yet the apostle John wants us to see that John the Baptist correctly identified and exalted Jesus. John the Baptist’s disciples leave him and follow Jesus; Jesus took over the ministry John began, increasing as John decreased (John 3:30).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:19-51<\/strong> John’s Gospel gives limited attention to John the Baptist compared to the synoptic Gospels (Matt 3:1-6; Mark 1:2-6; Luke 1:1-24, 57-80; 3:1-13). Yet the apostle John wants us to see that John the Baptist correctly identified and exalted Jesus. John the Baptist’s disciples leave him and follow Jesus; Jesus took over the ministry John began, increasing as John decreased (John 3:30).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:19-51 John’s Gospel gives limited attention to John the Baptist compared to the synoptic Gospels (Matt 3:1-6; Mark 1:2-6; Luke 1:1-24, 57-80; 3:1-13). Yet the apostle John wants us to see that John the Baptist correctly identified and exalted Jesus. John the Baptist’s disciples leave him and follow Jesus; Jesus took over the ministry John began, increasing as John decreased (John 3:30).","summary_en":"1:19-51 John’s Gospel gives limited attention to John the Baptist compared to the synoptic Gospels (Matt 3:1-6; Mark 1:2-6; Luke 1:1-24, 57-80; 3:1-13). Yet the apostle John wants us to see that John the Baptist correctly identified and exalted Jesus. John the Baptist’s disciples leave him and follow Jesus; Jesus took over the ministry John began, increasing as John decreased (John 3:30).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139198,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:19","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:19","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:19–12:50<\/strong> Jesus reveals himself to the world through his miraculous signs and sermons. Audiences were divided: Some wanted to believe in him; others opposed him. This division intensifies as the book unfolds. Jesus ended his public ministry with a final appeal for people to believe in him (12:44-50).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:19–12:50<\/strong> Jesus reveals himself to the world through his miraculous signs and sermons. Audiences were divided: Some wanted to believe in him; others opposed him. This division intensifies as the book unfolds. Jesus ended his public ministry with a final appeal for people to believe in him (12:44-50).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:19–12:50 Jesus reveals himself to the world through his miraculous signs and sermons. Audiences were divided: Some wanted to believe in him; others opposed him. This division intensifies as the book unfolds. Jesus ended his public ministry with a final appeal for people to believe in him (12:44-50).","summary_en":"1:19–12:50 Jesus reveals himself to the world through his miraculous signs and sermons. Audiences were divided: Some wanted to believe in him; others opposed him. This division intensifies as the book unfolds. Jesus ended his public ministry with a final appeal for people to believe in him (12:44-50).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139199,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:19","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:19","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:19-51<\/strong> John’s Gospel gives limited attention to John the Baptist compared to the synoptic Gospels (Matt 3:1-6; Mark 1:2-6; Luke 1:1-24, 57-80; 3:1-13). Yet the apostle John wants us to see that John the Baptist correctly identified and exalted Jesus. John the Baptist’s disciples leave him and follow Jesus; Jesus took over the ministry John began, increasing as John decreased (John 3:30).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:19-51<\/strong> John’s Gospel gives limited attention to John the Baptist compared to the synoptic Gospels (Matt 3:1-6; Mark 1:2-6; Luke 1:1-24, 57-80; 3:1-13). Yet the apostle John wants us to see that John the Baptist correctly identified and exalted Jesus. John the Baptist’s disciples leave him and follow Jesus; Jesus took over the ministry John began, increasing as John decreased (John 3:30).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:19-51 John’s Gospel gives limited attention to John the Baptist compared to the synoptic Gospels (Matt 3:1-6; Mark 1:2-6; Luke 1:1-24, 57-80; 3:1-13). Yet the apostle John wants us to see that John the Baptist correctly identified and exalted Jesus. John the Baptist’s disciples leave him and follow Jesus; Jesus took over the ministry John began, increasing as John decreased (John 3:30).","summary_en":"1:19-51 John’s Gospel gives limited attention to John the Baptist compared to the synoptic Gospels (Matt 3:1-6; Mark 1:2-6; Luke 1:1-24, 57-80; 3:1-13). Yet the apostle John wants us to see that John the Baptist correctly identified and exalted Jesus. John the Baptist’s disciples leave him and follow Jesus; Jesus took over the ministry John began, increasing as John decreased (John 3:30).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65929,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","title_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","content_ro":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","summary_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93555,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","title_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","content_ro":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","summary_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121181,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","title_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","content_ro":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","summary_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148807,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","title_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","content_ro":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","summary_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"20":[{"id":6315,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Christ","title_en":"Christ","content_ro":"<h3>CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Official title given to Jesus in the NT. It signifies his office as anointed Savior and alludes to his spiritual qualifications for the task of saving his people. The word derives from Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Christos<\/span><em>,<\/em> which translates Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Messiah<\/span> (Jn 1:41). Both terms come from verbs meaning “to anoint with sacred oil”; hence, as titles they mean “the Anointed One.” Applied to Jesus, they express the conviction that he had divine appointment for his office and function.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the title is used in combination with the given name, as “Jesus Christ” (Mt 1:1; Mk 1:1; Rom 1:4), “Christ Jesus” (<span>niv<\/span> Rom 1:1; 1 Cor 1:1), with the article “the” (Rom 7:4), or with another title “Lord” (Rom 16:18). It is also used alone as the one favored substitute name or title for Jesus (Jn 20:31; Rom 15:3; Heb 3:6; 5:5; 1 Pt 1:11, 19).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels portray Jesus as modestly accepting the title and role of the Messiah. His baptism should be understood as his anointing to the threefold office of prophet, priest, and king. At his baptism by John (the new Elijah, Mt 11:14), Jesus received the outpouring of the Spirit and God’s mandate to begin his ministry (Mt 3:16–4:17). John himself denied being the anointed one but tacitly identified Jesus as the Christ (Jn 1:20; Lk 3:14-17). Jesus’ first disciples followed him because they knew he was the Messiah (Jn 1:41). The demons recognized him as “the Holy One [anointed] of God” (Mk 1:24; cf. Mt 8:29). The crowds followed him as the Prophet, the new Moses (Jn 6:14, 32), but deserted him when they understood that his kingdom was a spiritual, not a political realm (v 66). The Twelve remained loyal, saying, “We believe . . . you are the Holy One of God” (Jn 6:69, <span>niv<\/span>). The confession of the disciples voiced by Peter and approved by Jesus as a divine revelation is “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Mt 16:16, <span>niv<\/span>). At his trials the decisive factor in Jesus’ condemnation was his claim to be the Christ (Mt 26:63-64, 68; 27:11, 17, 22, 37).<\/p>\n<p>An important feature in the earliest Christian preaching was the proclamation that Jesus is the Christ (Acts 2:36; 3:18-20; 9:22; 28:23, 31). This remains the earliest (Mt 16:16) and most basic article of Christian confession (1 Cor 1:23; 1 Jn 5:1), affirming that Jesus perfectly fulfilled the role of anointed prophet, priest, and king as the servant of God for his people (Lk 7:16; 1 Cor 15:25; Heb 7:22-28; Rv 19:16).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Messiah.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Official title given to Jesus in the NT. It signifies his office as anointed Savior and alludes to his spiritual qualifications for the task of saving his people. The word derives from Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Christos<\/span><em>,<\/em> which translates Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Messiah<\/span> (Jn 1:41). Both terms come from verbs meaning “to anoint with sacred oil”; hence, as titles they mean “the Anointed One.” Applied to Jesus, they express the conviction that he had divine appointment for his office and function.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the title is used in combination with the given name, as “Jesus Christ” (Mt 1:1; Mk 1:1; Rom 1:4), “Christ Jesus” (<span>niv<\/span> Rom 1:1; 1 Cor 1:1), with the article “the” (Rom 7:4), or with another title “Lord” (Rom 16:18). It is also used alone as the one favored substitute name or title for Jesus (Jn 20:31; Rom 15:3; Heb 3:6; 5:5; 1 Pt 1:11, 19).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels portray Jesus as modestly accepting the title and role of the Messiah. His baptism should be understood as his anointing to the threefold office of prophet, priest, and king. At his baptism by John (the new Elijah, Mt 11:14), Jesus received the outpouring of the Spirit and God’s mandate to begin his ministry (Mt 3:16–4:17). John himself denied being the anointed one but tacitly identified Jesus as the Christ (Jn 1:20; Lk 3:14-17). Jesus’ first disciples followed him because they knew he was the Messiah (Jn 1:41). The demons recognized him as “the Holy One [anointed] of God” (Mk 1:24; cf. Mt 8:29). The crowds followed him as the Prophet, the new Moses (Jn 6:14, 32), but deserted him when they understood that his kingdom was a spiritual, not a political realm (v 66). The Twelve remained loyal, saying, “We believe . . . you are the Holy One of God” (Jn 6:69, <span>niv<\/span>). The confession of the disciples voiced by Peter and approved by Jesus as a divine revelation is “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Mt 16:16, <span>niv<\/span>). At his trials the decisive factor in Jesus’ condemnation was his claim to be the Christ (Mt 26:63-64, 68; 27:11, 17, 22, 37).<\/p>\n<p>An important feature in the earliest Christian preaching was the proclamation that Jesus is the Christ (Acts 2:36; 3:18-20; 9:22; 28:23, 31). This remains the earliest (Mt 16:16) and most basic article of Christian confession (1 Cor 1:23; 1 Jn 5:1), affirming that Jesus perfectly fulfilled the role of anointed prophet, priest, and king as the servant of God for his people (Lk 7:16; 1 Cor 15:25; Heb 7:22-28; Rv 19:16).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Messiah.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CHRIST Official title given to Jesus in the NT. It signifies his office as anointed Savior and alludes to his spiritual qualifications for the task of saving his people. The word derives from Greek Christos, which translates Hebrew Messiah (Jn 1:41). Both terms come from verbs meaning “to anoint with sacred oil”; hence, as titles they mean “the Anointed One.” Applied to Jesus, they express the conviction that he had divine appointment for his office and function. In the NT the title is used i...","summary_en":"CHRIST Official title given to Jesus in the NT. It signifies his office as anointed Savior and alludes to his spiritual qualifications for the task of saving his people. The word derives from Greek Christos, which translates Hebrew Messiah (Jn 1:41). Both terms come from verbs meaning “to anoint with sacred oil”; hence, as titles they mean “the Anointed One.” Applied to Jesus, they express the conviction that he had divine appointment for his office and function. In the NT the title is used i...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20166,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel of John","title_en":"Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>JOHN, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>The fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospels. (See discussion above on John, the Apostle.)<\/p>\n\n<p>The Gospel appears to have been written by one who knew the Jews and the Palestine of Jesus’ day well. He was familiar with Jewish messianic expectations (e.g., Jn 1:20-21; 4:25; 7:40-42; 12:34). He knew of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9) and the contempt the Pharisees had for “the people of the land” (7:49). He knew of the importance attached to the religious schools (v 15). He knew the way the Sabbath was observed and was aware of the provision that the obligation to circumcise on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath regulations (vv 22-23). Throughout the Gospel he moved with certainty in the vast range of Jewish ideas and customs.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same with topography. The writer mentioned many places, and his place-names all seem to be used correctly. He referred to Cana, a village not mentioned in any earlier literature known to us, which means that the reference almost certainly came from someone who actually knew the place. He located Bethany with some precision as about 15 stadia from Jerusalem (about 2 miles, or 3.2 kilometers, 11:18). He had several references to places in or near Jerusalem, such as Bethesda (5:2), Siloam (9:7), and the Kidron Valley (18:1). Of course, this does not rule out some contemporary of John’s, but it makes it difficult to think of the author as a much later individual writing at a distance from Palestine. The evidence as we have it indicates that the writer was a Jew in the Palestine of Jesus’ day.<\/p>\n<p>To many careful readers, it seems that the Gospel bears the stamp of an eyewitness. For example, Jesus was teaching “in the treasury” (8:20). Nothing is made of the point; the incident could easily have been told without it. It looks like a reminiscence of someone who sees the scene in his mind’s eye as he writes. The fact that the house was filled with fragrance when the woman broke the perfume jar (12:3) does not materially affect the account but is the kind of detail that one who was there would remember. The author noted that the loaves used in the feeding of the multitude were barley loaves (6:9) and that Jesus’ tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top to bottom (19:23). He told us that the branches with which Jesus was greeted were palm branches (12:13), and that it was night when Judas went out (13:30). Such touches are found throughout the Gospel, and it seems unjustified to treat them as no more than an attempt to create verisimilitude. They seem much more like indications that the author was writing about events in which he had himself taken part.<\/p>\n<p>The early church accepted Johannine authorship without question. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all see the apostle as the author. The first to quote this Gospel by name was Theophilus of Antioch, about <span>AD<\/span> 180.<\/p>\n<p>Those who object to Johannine authorship emphasize the differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics. The argument is that if Jesus was anything like the Christ portrayed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he could not be like the Christ of the fourth Gospel. This is a completely subjective argument, ignoring the fact that any great man will appear differently to different people. The judgment of the church throughout the centuries has been that Jesus was large enough to inspire both portraits. To put the same point another way, we have no reason for holding that the first three Evangelists tell us all there is to know about Jesus. There is no contradiction. John simply brings out other aspects of Jesus’ life and teachings.<\/p>\n<p>While we cannot prove beyond all doubt that John the apostle was the author, we can say that there is more reason for holding to this view than to any other.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>It has been usual for conservatives and liberals alike to date this writing in the last decade of the first century or early in the second. Some liberal scholars have put it well into the second century, but this is not common, and it is remarkable that there has been such a considerable measure of agreement.<\/p>\n<p>It is said that this Gospel is dependent on the Synoptics, which means that it must be dated sometime after them. But this argument has been widely abandoned in recent times. There is so much in John that is without parallel in the other three Gospels, and conversely so much in the other three that John might have used had he known it, that it is very difficult indeed to hold that this writer had any of the other Gospels before him when he wrote, or even that he had read them. Such resemblances as there are seem better explained by common use of oral tradition.<\/p>\n<p>It is also argued that there is a very developed theology in John and that we must allow time for its development. Granted, the theology of this Gospel is profound, but this does not require that we must wait for it until the end of the first century. The theology of the Letter to the Romans is also profound, and there is no reason for dating that writing later than the 50s. On the ground of development, then, there is no reason for putting John later than Romans. Development is a slippery argument at best, for it usually takes place at uneven rates, and we have no means of knowing how fast it took place in the area where the author lived.<\/p>\n<p>Other arguments for a late date are no more conclusive. For example, it is urged that the ecclesiastical system presupposed by the Gospel is too late for the time of the apostle John, and that the sacramental system of chapters 3 and 6 must have taken time to develop. But John does not mention any sacrament. It is true that many scholars think these chapters refer to baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but the fact is that John mentions neither.<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising in view of the way the traditional arguments have crumbled away that many in recent times are arguing that John must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70. If it were later, why does not John have some reference to it? Some of his language appears to be earlier. In 5:2 he says there “is” (not “was”) a pool called Bethesda. And he often refers to the Twelve as Jesus’ disciples, or “his” disciples, or the like. In later times Christians usually said “the” disciples, for they saw no need to say whose the disciples were. But in the early days, when Christians were in contact with rabbis (each of whom had his disciples), it was important to show that Jesus’ disciples were in mind. It is important also that John makes no reference to any of the synoptic Gospels. The simplest explanation is that he had not seen them. They were not yet widely circulated.<\/p>\n<p>None of this enables us to date this Gospel with precision. But the weight of evidence points to an early date (before <span>AD<\/span> 70).<\/p>\n<p>The author was John the apostle, a Jew. However, the writing gives evidence of contact with Greek thought, for example, in the reference to Christ as “the Word” in chapter 1 and the translation of words like “rabbi” (1:38). It is almost universally held that such considerations compel us to see the work as originating in a center of Greek culture, and Ephesus has traditionally been favored. Before the end of the second century we have Irenaeus writing that John published the Gospel during his residence at Ephesus.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to similarities between John and the Odes of Solomon, which they think came from Syria. As there are also some resemblances in the language of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, this is held to show that John was written in Syria, probably at Antioch. Others again think that Egypt was the place, and they support this by pointing out that the oldest fragment of a manuscript of this Gospel was found there. There is no real evidence, and we are left with probabilities. There is much to be said for accepting the evidence of Irenaeus and seeing Ephesus as the place of origin, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>There is no real indication of the intended destination. From 20:31 we learn that the book was written that the readers might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and that by believing they might have life. The Gospel, then, has an evangelistic aim. But it is also possible that “believe” means “keep on believing”—“go on in faith,” rather than “begin to believe.” That is to say, the book may have been meant from the beginning to build people up in the faith. Probably we should not distinguish between these aims too sharply. Both may well be in mind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Several possible backgrounds to the Gospel have been suggested. The Greek interest is obvious, and this writing has sometimes been called the Gospel of the Hellenists. The suggestion is that we should look to Greek writings, perhaps the works of the philosophers or Philo of Alexandria, to find the right background against which to understand what John has written. This approach may be seen in the work of Rudolf Bultmann, who thought specifically of Gnosticism. Indeed, for Bultmann one of the sources of this Gospel was a discourse source that he thought was taken from non-Christian Gnosticism. Not many have been prepared to follow Bultmann, but a number of recent commentators have discerned some form of Gnosticism as the backdrop to John.<\/p>\n<p>While such views are put forward seriously, there are some substantial objections. One is that, despite the confident assertions of some scholars, Gnosticism has never been shown to be earlier than Christianity. In the form in which it comes before us in history, it is a Christian heresy, and of course, the Christian faith must appear before a Christian heresy is possible. Another objection is that there is a basic difference between the two systems. Gnosticism is concerned with knowledge (the very word is derived from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>,<\/em> “knowledge”). Its “redeemer” is one who comes from heaven with knowledge. But John does not subscribe to the view that man is saved by knowledge. The Redeemer comes to take away the sin of the world (1:29). Gnosticism tells people that life is an upward struggle; Christianity tells of a Savior who came down to raise them up. It is not easy to see any form of Gnosticism as the essential background to Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Much more significant is John’s Semitic background. Especially important here is the OT, accepted as sacred Scripture by Jew and Christian alike. It lies constantly behind John’s statements, and it must be studied carefully if John is to be understood. It is plain that John knew and loved the Septuagint, the translation into Greek of the Hebrew OT. Again and again, the Septuagint can be shown to lie behind what John says.<\/p>\n<p>In modern times important discoveries have been made at Qumran, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. Among the scrolls unearthed in the caves of this area are several that have affinities with John. Indeed, one of the interesting facts about the scrolls is that they have more parallels with John than with any other part of the NT, a fact difficult to explain if John was written late and at a distance from Palestine. The resemblances to the Qumran writings must be viewed with care, for there is often a linguistic resemblance where the thinking is quite different. For example, both use the unusual expression “the Spirit of truth.” But where John means one of the persons of the Trinity, the scrolls speak of “a spirit of truth” and “a spirit of error” striving in the souls of people. The connection is real, but John is clearly not dependent on the scrolls for his thinking. The contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they afford additional evidence that this Gospel is basically Palestinian and must be understood against a background of first-century Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Other backgrounds have been suggested, such as the Hermetic literature. This is a group of writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus (“Hermes Thrice-greatest”), a designation of the Egyptian god Thoth. There are indeed some points of contact with John, but they are few in comparison with those of writings rooted in Palestine. It is difficult to take such suggestions seriously. John is essentially Palestinian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The writer told us that Jesus did many “signs” (or miracles) that he had not recorded, but “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life” (Jn 20:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). John wrote to show that Jesus is the Messiah. But he did not do this simply with a view to conveying interesting information. He wanted his readers to see this knowledge as a challenge to faith; when they believe, they will have life. John sought to bring men and women to Christ; he had an evangelistic aim. That does not exhaust what he was trying to do, for his words have meaning for believers. It is important that believers have a right knowledge of Jesus and that they continue to believe.<\/p>\n<p>The main theological teaching of this Gospel, then, is that God has sent his Messiah, Jesus. He is the very Son of God, and he comes to bring life (3:16). Though Jesus told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, this is not often said so specifically. The avoidance of the term might well be because of the political overtones it had acquired among the Jews at large. They looked for a Messiah who would fight the Romans. He would defeat them and set up a mighty world empire with its capital in Jerusalem. Jesus was not aiming at anything like that, and it was important that he avoid the kind of language that would give that impression. But though the conventional messianic terminology is avoided, John left no doubt that Jesus was God’s chosen one. Again and again he depicted Jesus as fulfilling messianic functions. For example, in the long discourse in chapter 6 we see Jesus as the bread from heaven, fulfilling the expectation that when Messiah came, he would renew the manna; and in the giving of sight to the blind man (ch 9) we have another messianic function (cf. Is 35:5).<\/p>\n<p>With this greatness of Jesus, John also combined teaching about his lowliness. A continuing, though unobtrusive, strand of Johannine teaching is that Jesus depends on the Father for everything. Apart from the Father, Jesus said, he could do nothing (Jn 5:30). His very food is to do the Father’s will (4:34). He lives through the Father (6:57). It is the Father who gives him his disciples (6:37, 44; 17:6). It is the Father who bears witness to him (5:32, 37). John insists that Jesus is in no sense independent of the Father. In the mission of Jesus, John sees the working out of the purpose of the Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue and Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>John begins with a prologue (1:1-18) that is unlike anything in any of the other Gospels. In it he refers to Jesus as “the Word,” a term that has points of contact with both Greek and Hebrew thinking. As John uses it, it conveys the thought that Jesus is the expression of the mind of the Father. John speaks of the Word as God (1:1), sees him as active in creation (1:3-5), goes on to the witness borne to him by John the Baptist (1:6-8), speaks of the coming of the Word into the world (1:9-14), and finishes with a section on the greatness of the Word (1:15-18). In this prologue he briefly introduces some of the great themes that will be developed throughout the Gospel. It is a majestic introduction to the whole.<\/p>\n<p>Next we have the beginnings of Jesus’ public ministry (1:19-51). Jesus’ work was preceded by that of John the Baptist, and the Evangelist tells us first about the kind of witness that the Baptist gave to Jesus. Witness is one of his important concepts, and witness is all that John the Baptist does in this Gospel. From this witness we move to the way the first disciples came to Jesus. We learn something of how Andrew and Peter came to know the Lord. We read also of Philip and Nathanael, of whom we learn little or nothing in the other Gospels.<\/p>\n<h5>The Signs and Discourses (2:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The public ministry of Jesus is described in a very distinctive way in this Gospel. John has a long section (chs 2–12) in which he tells of a number of miracles Jesus did, interweaving into his account a series of discourses. Sometimes these are addresses given to groups of people, and sometimes they are talks with individuals. Some scholars call this section of the Gospel the Book of Signs, thus emphasizing the prominent place given to seven miracles. For John they are not simply wonders. They are meaningful; in the literal sense of the term they are <em>sign<\/em>ificant.<\/p>\n<p>The first of them is the turning of the water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee (2:1-11). The water in question is connected with Jewish rites of purification (v 6), and the story is surely to teach us that Jesus transforms life. He changes the water of the law into the wine of the gospel. As a result of this “sign,” his disciples believed in him (v 11). John went on to tell how Jesus went up to Jerusalem and drove the traders out of the temple. They were selling animals for sacrifice and changing money. But their business was being done in the Court of the Gentiles, the only place in the temple where a Gentile could come to meditate and pray.<\/p>\n<p>The first discourse is on the new birth (3:1-21). Jesus talked with Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, about the necessity for radical renewal if one is to enter the kingdom. Jesus was speaking of God’s regenerating activity, not some human reformation. Following this, John records a dispute between some of John’s disciples with a Jew on the subject of purification. This opens the way for a section that shows the superiority of Jesus over John the Baptist—by the Baptist’s own confession (3:22-36).<\/p>\n<p>The second discourse is really a long conversation Jesus had with the woman of Samaria, whom he met by a well (4:1-42). It turns on “the water of life,” a term that is not fully explained in this chapter but which we later find points to the life-giving Spirit (7:38-39). This leads to the story of the second sign, the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54), notable for the fact that Jesus healed at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>The third sign is the healing of the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (5:1-18). This man had spent many years waiting for healing at the moving of the water. Jesus told him to get up and walk, and he did. Because it was done on a Sabbath, the Pharisees objected. This leads to Jesus’ third discourse, that on the divine Son (5:19-47). Here the closeness of the relationship of Jesus to the Father is stressed, and his place in the judgment is brought out. There is emphasis also on the variety of witness who encountered Jesus, which shows how reasonable it is to accept him as God’s own Son.<\/p>\n<p>John’s fourth sign is the one miracle (apart from the resurrection) found in all four Gospels: the feeding of the 5,000 (6:1-15). It is followed by Jesus’ walking on water (vv 16-21), which seems to be meant as the fifth sign (though some scholars think not; if they are right, there are only six signs). Then comes the fourth discourse, the great sermon on the bread of life (vv 22-59). Jesus is this bread, which he gives to all men and women who believe in him. There are references to eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv 50-58), which point to his death. Some have seen in them a reference to Communion, but it is hard to see why Jesus should refer in this way to an as-yet-nonexistent sacrament. Moreover, much the same effect is attributed in the same discourse to believing (vv 35, 47). It seems best to understand Jesus as meaning that people must believe in him as the one who would die for them in order for them to have life.<\/p>\n<p>There is a section detailing Peter’s affirmation of loyalty in the face of some who drifted away from the Master (6:67-71). Then we come to the fifth discourse, on the life-giving Spirit (7:1-52). John has an important explanatory point of his own when he tells us that at the time the Spirit had not been given because Jesus had not yet been glorified (v 39). The fullness of the Spirit depends on the completion of the work of Christ in his death and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The sixth discourse tells of the light of the world (8:12-59). This aspect of Jesus’ person and ministry is dramatically brought out in the sixth sign, the healing of the man born blind (ch 9). It is a lively narrative, as the healed man conducts a spirited defense against the Pharisees who belittled Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most beautiful of all the illustrations of Jesus’ relations to his people is that on which he dwells in the seventh discourse, where he speaks of himself as the good shepherd (ch 10). There is the obvious truth that sheep depend entirely on their shepherd, but Jesus says something else. Whereas earthly shepherds live to meet the needs of their sheep, Jesus laid down his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The final sign is the raising of Lazarus (11:1-44), a man who had been dead for four days. The story graphically brings out Jesus’ power over death and his readiness to confer the gift of life. Jesus speaks of himself as “the resurrection and the life” (v 25); death cannot defeat him. He brings life to the dead, to the spiritually dead as well as to physically dead Lazarus. John goes on to note the reaction to this miracle: some believed, but some opposed Jesus (vv 45-57). He includes a notable saying of Caiaphas, the high priest, that one man should die for the people (vv 50-52). Caiaphas was speaking as a cynical politician (better one dead, however innocent, than the whole nation be troubled). But John saw in the words the deeper meaning that Jesus’ death would bring salvation to many.<\/p>\n<p>John rounds off his account of the ministry with the story of the anointing of Jesus by a woman in Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the coming of some Greeks to Jesus, and his final summary of what he had taught (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Last Supper<\/h5>\n<p>The account of what went on in the upper room on the night before the Crucifixion is the fullest of all the four Gospels. Curiously, John says nothing about the institution of Communion, a fact that has never been satisfactorily explained. But he tells us how Jesus washed the feet of the disciples (13:1-17), an action splendidly exemplifying the spirit of lowly service so soon to be shown on the cross. Then comes the prophecy of the betrayal, an action that set in motion the events that would lead to the cross (vv 18-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the long discourse that follows, Jesus dealt with some questions posed by his followers and went on to teach them some important truths, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). He develops the thought that he is the true vine, the disciples being vitally joined to him as branches to the vine. It is important for the branches to remain in the vine if they are to have life (15:1-16). Then come some words about suffering that would be of help to them in times of persecution (vv 17-25). Jesus goes on to speak about the Holy Spirit (15:26–16:15). This is a very important passage, for it contains much more about the Spirit than we find elsewhere in Jesus’ words. Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete,” a title not easy to understand. It is in origin a legal term, and at least we can say that it indicates that the Spirit brings friendship, encouragement, and help. Jesus went on to speak of his approaching departure from the disciples and to prepare them for the trying time ahead (16:16-33). This part of the Gospel concludes with Jesus’ great High Priestly prayer. He prayed for the disciples to be one, as he commended them to the care of the heavenly Father (ch 17).<\/p>\n<h5>The Cross and Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, he went forward to meet them and they fell to the ground (18:1-11). He gave himself over to them; they did not take him over. At the outset of his passion narrative, John was making the point that Jesus is sovereign. He was not being defeated by the march of events but was sovereignly doing the will of the Father. John is the only one to tell us that Jesus was taken before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, the reigning high priest (18:12-14, 19-24). He tells also of Peter’s three denials of Jesus (vv 15-27). He did not spend much time on the Jewish trial, but he was much more explicit than the other Evangelists in his account of the Roman trial. Clearly, he had some special knowledge of what went on before Pilate. He presents a magnificent picture of Jesus talking with Pilate about kingship—the Son of God discussing with the representative of Caesar the meaning of sovereignty (vv 33-40).<\/p>\n<p>In his account of the Crucifixion John has a number of touches of his own, notably the way Jesus commended Mary to the care of the beloved disciple (19:26-27), the fact that the cry Jesus uttered as he died was “It is finished” (v 30), and the piercing of his side by a soldier’s spear (vv 31-37).<\/p>\n<p>John proceeds to the narrative of the burial (vv 38-42) and of the empty tomb (20:1-10). He speaks of appearances of the risen Lord to Mary Magdalene (vv 11-18), and to the disciples—both without (vv 19-23) and with Thomas (vv 24-29).<\/p>\n<p>The final chapter, an epilogue, tells of a miraculous catch of fish (21:1-14) and goes on to the moving account of Peter’s threefold declaration of love to Jesus and his restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOHN, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>The fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospels. (See discussion above on John, the Apostle.)<\/p>\n\n<p>The Gospel appears to have been written by one who knew the Jews and the Palestine of Jesus’ day well. He was familiar with Jewish messianic expectations (e.g., Jn 1:20-21; 4:25; 7:40-42; 12:34). He knew of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9) and the contempt the Pharisees had for “the people of the land” (7:49). He knew of the importance attached to the religious schools (v 15). He knew the way the Sabbath was observed and was aware of the provision that the obligation to circumcise on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath regulations (vv 22-23). Throughout the Gospel he moved with certainty in the vast range of Jewish ideas and customs.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same with topography. The writer mentioned many places, and his place-names all seem to be used correctly. He referred to Cana, a village not mentioned in any earlier literature known to us, which means that the reference almost certainly came from someone who actually knew the place. He located Bethany with some precision as about 15 stadia from Jerusalem (about 2 miles, or 3.2 kilometers, 11:18). He had several references to places in or near Jerusalem, such as Bethesda (5:2), Siloam (9:7), and the Kidron Valley (18:1). Of course, this does not rule out some contemporary of John’s, but it makes it difficult to think of the author as a much later individual writing at a distance from Palestine. The evidence as we have it indicates that the writer was a Jew in the Palestine of Jesus’ day.<\/p>\n<p>To many careful readers, it seems that the Gospel bears the stamp of an eyewitness. For example, Jesus was teaching “in the treasury” (8:20). Nothing is made of the point; the incident could easily have been told without it. It looks like a reminiscence of someone who sees the scene in his mind’s eye as he writes. The fact that the house was filled with fragrance when the woman broke the perfume jar (12:3) does not materially affect the account but is the kind of detail that one who was there would remember. The author noted that the loaves used in the feeding of the multitude were barley loaves (6:9) and that Jesus’ tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top to bottom (19:23). He told us that the branches with which Jesus was greeted were palm branches (12:13), and that it was night when Judas went out (13:30). Such touches are found throughout the Gospel, and it seems unjustified to treat them as no more than an attempt to create verisimilitude. They seem much more like indications that the author was writing about events in which he had himself taken part.<\/p>\n<p>The early church accepted Johannine authorship without question. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all see the apostle as the author. The first to quote this Gospel by name was Theophilus of Antioch, about <span>AD<\/span> 180.<\/p>\n<p>Those who object to Johannine authorship emphasize the differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics. The argument is that if Jesus was anything like the Christ portrayed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he could not be like the Christ of the fourth Gospel. This is a completely subjective argument, ignoring the fact that any great man will appear differently to different people. The judgment of the church throughout the centuries has been that Jesus was large enough to inspire both portraits. To put the same point another way, we have no reason for holding that the first three Evangelists tell us all there is to know about Jesus. There is no contradiction. John simply brings out other aspects of Jesus’ life and teachings.<\/p>\n<p>While we cannot prove beyond all doubt that John the apostle was the author, we can say that there is more reason for holding to this view than to any other.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>It has been usual for conservatives and liberals alike to date this writing in the last decade of the first century or early in the second. Some liberal scholars have put it well into the second century, but this is not common, and it is remarkable that there has been such a considerable measure of agreement.<\/p>\n<p>It is said that this Gospel is dependent on the Synoptics, which means that it must be dated sometime after them. But this argument has been widely abandoned in recent times. There is so much in John that is without parallel in the other three Gospels, and conversely so much in the other three that John might have used had he known it, that it is very difficult indeed to hold that this writer had any of the other Gospels before him when he wrote, or even that he had read them. Such resemblances as there are seem better explained by common use of oral tradition.<\/p>\n<p>It is also argued that there is a very developed theology in John and that we must allow time for its development. Granted, the theology of this Gospel is profound, but this does not require that we must wait for it until the end of the first century. The theology of the Letter to the Romans is also profound, and there is no reason for dating that writing later than the 50s. On the ground of development, then, there is no reason for putting John later than Romans. Development is a slippery argument at best, for it usually takes place at uneven rates, and we have no means of knowing how fast it took place in the area where the author lived.<\/p>\n<p>Other arguments for a late date are no more conclusive. For example, it is urged that the ecclesiastical system presupposed by the Gospel is too late for the time of the apostle John, and that the sacramental system of chapters 3 and 6 must have taken time to develop. But John does not mention any sacrament. It is true that many scholars think these chapters refer to baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but the fact is that John mentions neither.<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising in view of the way the traditional arguments have crumbled away that many in recent times are arguing that John must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70. If it were later, why does not John have some reference to it? Some of his language appears to be earlier. In 5:2 he says there “is” (not “was”) a pool called Bethesda. And he often refers to the Twelve as Jesus’ disciples, or “his” disciples, or the like. In later times Christians usually said “the” disciples, for they saw no need to say whose the disciples were. But in the early days, when Christians were in contact with rabbis (each of whom had his disciples), it was important to show that Jesus’ disciples were in mind. It is important also that John makes no reference to any of the synoptic Gospels. The simplest explanation is that he had not seen them. They were not yet widely circulated.<\/p>\n<p>None of this enables us to date this Gospel with precision. But the weight of evidence points to an early date (before <span>AD<\/span> 70).<\/p>\n<p>The author was John the apostle, a Jew. However, the writing gives evidence of contact with Greek thought, for example, in the reference to Christ as “the Word” in chapter 1 and the translation of words like “rabbi” (1:38). It is almost universally held that such considerations compel us to see the work as originating in a center of Greek culture, and Ephesus has traditionally been favored. Before the end of the second century we have Irenaeus writing that John published the Gospel during his residence at Ephesus.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to similarities between John and the Odes of Solomon, which they think came from Syria. As there are also some resemblances in the language of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, this is held to show that John was written in Syria, probably at Antioch. Others again think that Egypt was the place, and they support this by pointing out that the oldest fragment of a manuscript of this Gospel was found there. There is no real evidence, and we are left with probabilities. There is much to be said for accepting the evidence of Irenaeus and seeing Ephesus as the place of origin, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>There is no real indication of the intended destination. From 20:31 we learn that the book was written that the readers might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and that by believing they might have life. The Gospel, then, has an evangelistic aim. But it is also possible that “believe” means “keep on believing”—“go on in faith,” rather than “begin to believe.” That is to say, the book may have been meant from the beginning to build people up in the faith. Probably we should not distinguish between these aims too sharply. Both may well be in mind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Several possible backgrounds to the Gospel have been suggested. The Greek interest is obvious, and this writing has sometimes been called the Gospel of the Hellenists. The suggestion is that we should look to Greek writings, perhaps the works of the philosophers or Philo of Alexandria, to find the right background against which to understand what John has written. This approach may be seen in the work of Rudolf Bultmann, who thought specifically of Gnosticism. Indeed, for Bultmann one of the sources of this Gospel was a discourse source that he thought was taken from non-Christian Gnosticism. Not many have been prepared to follow Bultmann, but a number of recent commentators have discerned some form of Gnosticism as the backdrop to John.<\/p>\n<p>While such views are put forward seriously, there are some substantial objections. One is that, despite the confident assertions of some scholars, Gnosticism has never been shown to be earlier than Christianity. In the form in which it comes before us in history, it is a Christian heresy, and of course, the Christian faith must appear before a Christian heresy is possible. Another objection is that there is a basic difference between the two systems. Gnosticism is concerned with knowledge (the very word is derived from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>,<\/em> “knowledge”). Its “redeemer” is one who comes from heaven with knowledge. But John does not subscribe to the view that man is saved by knowledge. The Redeemer comes to take away the sin of the world (1:29). Gnosticism tells people that life is an upward struggle; Christianity tells of a Savior who came down to raise them up. It is not easy to see any form of Gnosticism as the essential background to Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Much more significant is John’s Semitic background. Especially important here is the OT, accepted as sacred Scripture by Jew and Christian alike. It lies constantly behind John’s statements, and it must be studied carefully if John is to be understood. It is plain that John knew and loved the Septuagint, the translation into Greek of the Hebrew OT. Again and again, the Septuagint can be shown to lie behind what John says.<\/p>\n<p>In modern times important discoveries have been made at Qumran, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. Among the scrolls unearthed in the caves of this area are several that have affinities with John. Indeed, one of the interesting facts about the scrolls is that they have more parallels with John than with any other part of the NT, a fact difficult to explain if John was written late and at a distance from Palestine. The resemblances to the Qumran writings must be viewed with care, for there is often a linguistic resemblance where the thinking is quite different. For example, both use the unusual expression “the Spirit of truth.” But where John means one of the persons of the Trinity, the scrolls speak of “a spirit of truth” and “a spirit of error” striving in the souls of people. The connection is real, but John is clearly not dependent on the scrolls for his thinking. The contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they afford additional evidence that this Gospel is basically Palestinian and must be understood against a background of first-century Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Other backgrounds have been suggested, such as the Hermetic literature. This is a group of writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus (“Hermes Thrice-greatest”), a designation of the Egyptian god Thoth. There are indeed some points of contact with John, but they are few in comparison with those of writings rooted in Palestine. It is difficult to take such suggestions seriously. John is essentially Palestinian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The writer told us that Jesus did many “signs” (or miracles) that he had not recorded, but “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life” (Jn 20:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). John wrote to show that Jesus is the Messiah. But he did not do this simply with a view to conveying interesting information. He wanted his readers to see this knowledge as a challenge to faith; when they believe, they will have life. John sought to bring men and women to Christ; he had an evangelistic aim. That does not exhaust what he was trying to do, for his words have meaning for believers. It is important that believers have a right knowledge of Jesus and that they continue to believe.<\/p>\n<p>The main theological teaching of this Gospel, then, is that God has sent his Messiah, Jesus. He is the very Son of God, and he comes to bring life (3:16). Though Jesus told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, this is not often said so specifically. The avoidance of the term might well be because of the political overtones it had acquired among the Jews at large. They looked for a Messiah who would fight the Romans. He would defeat them and set up a mighty world empire with its capital in Jerusalem. Jesus was not aiming at anything like that, and it was important that he avoid the kind of language that would give that impression. But though the conventional messianic terminology is avoided, John left no doubt that Jesus was God’s chosen one. Again and again he depicted Jesus as fulfilling messianic functions. For example, in the long discourse in chapter 6 we see Jesus as the bread from heaven, fulfilling the expectation that when Messiah came, he would renew the manna; and in the giving of sight to the blind man (ch 9) we have another messianic function (cf. Is 35:5).<\/p>\n<p>With this greatness of Jesus, John also combined teaching about his lowliness. A continuing, though unobtrusive, strand of Johannine teaching is that Jesus depends on the Father for everything. Apart from the Father, Jesus said, he could do nothing (Jn 5:30). His very food is to do the Father’s will (4:34). He lives through the Father (6:57). It is the Father who gives him his disciples (6:37, 44; 17:6). It is the Father who bears witness to him (5:32, 37). John insists that Jesus is in no sense independent of the Father. In the mission of Jesus, John sees the working out of the purpose of the Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue and Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>John begins with a prologue (1:1-18) that is unlike anything in any of the other Gospels. In it he refers to Jesus as “the Word,” a term that has points of contact with both Greek and Hebrew thinking. As John uses it, it conveys the thought that Jesus is the expression of the mind of the Father. John speaks of the Word as God (1:1), sees him as active in creation (1:3-5), goes on to the witness borne to him by John the Baptist (1:6-8), speaks of the coming of the Word into the world (1:9-14), and finishes with a section on the greatness of the Word (1:15-18). In this prologue he briefly introduces some of the great themes that will be developed throughout the Gospel. It is a majestic introduction to the whole.<\/p>\n<p>Next we have the beginnings of Jesus’ public ministry (1:19-51). Jesus’ work was preceded by that of John the Baptist, and the Evangelist tells us first about the kind of witness that the Baptist gave to Jesus. Witness is one of his important concepts, and witness is all that John the Baptist does in this Gospel. From this witness we move to the way the first disciples came to Jesus. We learn something of how Andrew and Peter came to know the Lord. We read also of Philip and Nathanael, of whom we learn little or nothing in the other Gospels.<\/p>\n<h5>The Signs and Discourses (2:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The public ministry of Jesus is described in a very distinctive way in this Gospel. John has a long section (chs 2–12) in which he tells of a number of miracles Jesus did, interweaving into his account a series of discourses. Sometimes these are addresses given to groups of people, and sometimes they are talks with individuals. Some scholars call this section of the Gospel the Book of Signs, thus emphasizing the prominent place given to seven miracles. For John they are not simply wonders. They are meaningful; in the literal sense of the term they are <em>sign<\/em>ificant.<\/p>\n<p>The first of them is the turning of the water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee (2:1-11). The water in question is connected with Jewish rites of purification (v 6), and the story is surely to teach us that Jesus transforms life. He changes the water of the law into the wine of the gospel. As a result of this “sign,” his disciples believed in him (v 11). John went on to tell how Jesus went up to Jerusalem and drove the traders out of the temple. They were selling animals for sacrifice and changing money. But their business was being done in the Court of the Gentiles, the only place in the temple where a Gentile could come to meditate and pray.<\/p>\n<p>The first discourse is on the new birth (3:1-21). Jesus talked with Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, about the necessity for radical renewal if one is to enter the kingdom. Jesus was speaking of God’s regenerating activity, not some human reformation. Following this, John records a dispute between some of John’s disciples with a Jew on the subject of purification. This opens the way for a section that shows the superiority of Jesus over John the Baptist—by the Baptist’s own confession (3:22-36).<\/p>\n<p>The second discourse is really a long conversation Jesus had with the woman of Samaria, whom he met by a well (4:1-42). It turns on “the water of life,” a term that is not fully explained in this chapter but which we later find points to the life-giving Spirit (7:38-39). This leads to the story of the second sign, the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54), notable for the fact that Jesus healed at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>The third sign is the healing of the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (5:1-18). This man had spent many years waiting for healing at the moving of the water. Jesus told him to get up and walk, and he did. Because it was done on a Sabbath, the Pharisees objected. This leads to Jesus’ third discourse, that on the divine Son (5:19-47). Here the closeness of the relationship of Jesus to the Father is stressed, and his place in the judgment is brought out. There is emphasis also on the variety of witness who encountered Jesus, which shows how reasonable it is to accept him as God’s own Son.<\/p>\n<p>John’s fourth sign is the one miracle (apart from the resurrection) found in all four Gospels: the feeding of the 5,000 (6:1-15). It is followed by Jesus’ walking on water (vv 16-21), which seems to be meant as the fifth sign (though some scholars think not; if they are right, there are only six signs). Then comes the fourth discourse, the great sermon on the bread of life (vv 22-59). Jesus is this bread, which he gives to all men and women who believe in him. There are references to eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv 50-58), which point to his death. Some have seen in them a reference to Communion, but it is hard to see why Jesus should refer in this way to an as-yet-nonexistent sacrament. Moreover, much the same effect is attributed in the same discourse to believing (vv 35, 47). It seems best to understand Jesus as meaning that people must believe in him as the one who would die for them in order for them to have life.<\/p>\n<p>There is a section detailing Peter’s affirmation of loyalty in the face of some who drifted away from the Master (6:67-71). Then we come to the fifth discourse, on the life-giving Spirit (7:1-52). John has an important explanatory point of his own when he tells us that at the time the Spirit had not been given because Jesus had not yet been glorified (v 39). The fullness of the Spirit depends on the completion of the work of Christ in his death and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The sixth discourse tells of the light of the world (8:12-59). This aspect of Jesus’ person and ministry is dramatically brought out in the sixth sign, the healing of the man born blind (ch 9). It is a lively narrative, as the healed man conducts a spirited defense against the Pharisees who belittled Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most beautiful of all the illustrations of Jesus’ relations to his people is that on which he dwells in the seventh discourse, where he speaks of himself as the good shepherd (ch 10). There is the obvious truth that sheep depend entirely on their shepherd, but Jesus says something else. Whereas earthly shepherds live to meet the needs of their sheep, Jesus laid down his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The final sign is the raising of Lazarus (11:1-44), a man who had been dead for four days. The story graphically brings out Jesus’ power over death and his readiness to confer the gift of life. Jesus speaks of himself as “the resurrection and the life” (v 25); death cannot defeat him. He brings life to the dead, to the spiritually dead as well as to physically dead Lazarus. John goes on to note the reaction to this miracle: some believed, but some opposed Jesus (vv 45-57). He includes a notable saying of Caiaphas, the high priest, that one man should die for the people (vv 50-52). Caiaphas was speaking as a cynical politician (better one dead, however innocent, than the whole nation be troubled). But John saw in the words the deeper meaning that Jesus’ death would bring salvation to many.<\/p>\n<p>John rounds off his account of the ministry with the story of the anointing of Jesus by a woman in Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the coming of some Greeks to Jesus, and his final summary of what he had taught (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Last Supper<\/h5>\n<p>The account of what went on in the upper room on the night before the Crucifixion is the fullest of all the four Gospels. Curiously, John says nothing about the institution of Communion, a fact that has never been satisfactorily explained. But he tells us how Jesus washed the feet of the disciples (13:1-17), an action splendidly exemplifying the spirit of lowly service so soon to be shown on the cross. Then comes the prophecy of the betrayal, an action that set in motion the events that would lead to the cross (vv 18-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the long discourse that follows, Jesus dealt with some questions posed by his followers and went on to teach them some important truths, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). He develops the thought that he is the true vine, the disciples being vitally joined to him as branches to the vine. It is important for the branches to remain in the vine if they are to have life (15:1-16). Then come some words about suffering that would be of help to them in times of persecution (vv 17-25). Jesus goes on to speak about the Holy Spirit (15:26–16:15). This is a very important passage, for it contains much more about the Spirit than we find elsewhere in Jesus’ words. Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete,” a title not easy to understand. It is in origin a legal term, and at least we can say that it indicates that the Spirit brings friendship, encouragement, and help. Jesus went on to speak of his approaching departure from the disciples and to prepare them for the trying time ahead (16:16-33). This part of the Gospel concludes with Jesus’ great High Priestly prayer. He prayed for the disciples to be one, as he commended them to the care of the heavenly Father (ch 17).<\/p>\n<h5>The Cross and Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, he went forward to meet them and they fell to the ground (18:1-11). He gave himself over to them; they did not take him over. At the outset of his passion narrative, John was making the point that Jesus is sovereign. He was not being defeated by the march of events but was sovereignly doing the will of the Father. John is the only one to tell us that Jesus was taken before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, the reigning high priest (18:12-14, 19-24). He tells also of Peter’s three denials of Jesus (vv 15-27). He did not spend much time on the Jewish trial, but he was much more explicit than the other Evangelists in his account of the Roman trial. Clearly, he had some special knowledge of what went on before Pilate. He presents a magnificent picture of Jesus talking with Pilate about kingship—the Son of God discussing with the representative of Caesar the meaning of sovereignty (vv 33-40).<\/p>\n<p>In his account of the Crucifixion John has a number of touches of his own, notably the way Jesus commended Mary to the care of the beloved disciple (19:26-27), the fact that the cry Jesus uttered as he died was “It is finished” (v 30), and the piercing of his side by a soldier’s spear (vv 31-37).<\/p>\n<p>John proceeds to the narrative of the burial (vv 38-42) and of the empty tomb (20:1-10). He speaks of appearances of the risen Lord to Mary Magdalene (vv 11-18), and to the disciples—both without (vv 19-23) and with Thomas (vv 24-29).<\/p>\n<p>The final chapter, an epilogue, tells of a miraculous catch of fish (21:1-14) and goes on to the moving account of Peter’s threefold declaration of love to Jesus and his restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOHN, Gospel of The fourth Gospel. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospe...","summary_en":"JOHN, Gospel of The fourth Gospel. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospe...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20339,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>JOHN THE BAPTIST<\/h3>\n<p>Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29, while Jesus was still ministering.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>• Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>• John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>• Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>• The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BirthInfancyandBoyhood\">Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s Gospel is our only source of information concerning the birth and boyhood of John. The Gospel writer states that John was born in the hill country of Judah (Lk 1:39) of priestly descent, being the son of Zechariah, a priest of the order of Abijah, and Elizabeth, a descendant of Aaron (v 5). Both parents were righteous in the sight of God, following all the commandments closely (v 6). Like the birth of Jesus, only to a much lesser degree, the birth of John the Baptist is described in Luke as extraordinary. The angel Gabriel announced the coming birth to Zechariah in the temple; to the older, barren Elizabeth it came as an answer to prayer (vv 8-13). John’s name is announced to Zechariah by the angel, even as his purpose as forerunner is revealed before birth (vv 13-17). Such a consecration from birth is reminiscent of the call of the OT prophet Jeremiah (cf. Jer 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>There existed some familial relationship between the families of John and Jesus. Elizabeth is described as a relative of Mary (Lk 1:36), which may connote cousin or aunt, or may only mean being from the same tribe.<\/p>\n<p>John’s childhood, as that of Jesus, is left quite vague in the Gospel account. All that is said is that “John grew up and became strong in spirit. Then he lived out in the wilderness until he began his public ministry to Israel” (Lk 1:80, <span>nlt<\/span>). Some scholars have suggested that John might have been adopted as a boy by the Essenes (as was their practice) at Qumran and reared in their wilderness community, adjacent to the Dead Sea and near the Jordan River. There are some similarities between the activities of the Qumran sect, known through the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the later ministry of John the Baptist. Both practiced a type of asceticism and removed themselves from the life of Jerusalem. Both practiced baptism and associated this rite with initiation and repentance. Finally, John and the Qumran group were both eschatologically minded, awaiting God’s final end-time activity in history. Nevertheless, many significant differences exist between John and the Qumran sect.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AppearanceandIdentity\">Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>Mark’s Gospel begins with an account of John the Baptist’s appearance: “John the Baptist . . . lived in the wilderness and was preaching that people should be baptized to show that they had turned from their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Mk 1:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). A rich OT background lies behind John’s association with the wilderness, in this case the wilderness of Judea. It was in the wilderness that God revealed himself to Moses (Ex 3), gave the law, and entered into the covenant with Israel (ch 19). It was also the site of refuge for David (1 Sm 23–26; Ps 63) and Elijah (1 Kgs 19), and in this light became the anticipated site of God’s future deliverance (Is 40:3-5; Ez 47:1-12; Hos 2:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The unusual dress of John the Baptist—“clothing made of camel’s hair, with a leather belt around his waist” (Mk 1:6, <span>niv<\/span>)—may have suggested to his audience an association with Elijah in particular (2 Kgs 1:8) or with the prophets in general (Zec 13:4). His diet, “locusts and wild honey” (Mk 1:6), was Levitically clean, reflecting one who lived off the desert (such food was also eaten at Qumran) and formed part of the broader asceticism practiced by John and his disciples (Mt 9:14; 11:18).<\/p>\n<p>Who did John understand himself to be? In answer to questions by the multitude whether he was the Messiah, Elijah, or the expected prophet (Jn 1:20-23), John only identified himself as “a voice crying in the wilderness, ‘Prepare the way of the Lord’ ” (Is 40:3). The background for the question lies at the end of the OT period. Prophecy, on the one hand, was considered to have ceased (Zec 13:2-6); yet, on the other hand, it was expected to appear again before the coming of the messianic kingdom (see Jl 2:28-29; Mal 3:1-4). Some anticipated this final prophet to be one who was like Moses (Dt 18:15), others a returning Elijah as foretold in Malachi 4:5-6. While John personally refrained from identifying himself with these specific expectations (Jn 1:20-23), it is clear that his dress, lifestyle, and message caused the people to identify him with this end-time prophet (Mt 14:5; Mk 11:32). Jesus also saw John as this final “Elijah-like” prophet (Mt 11:7-15), who from Malachi’s prophecy was to be a forerunner to the coming of the Lord (Mal 3:1-4; 4:5-6).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsProclamation\">John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>John’s proclamation involved three elements: a warning of imminent judgment at the hands of the Coming One, a call for repentance in light of the coming kingdom of heaven, and a demand to express this repentance in concrete ethical terms. Many Jews looked forward confidently to the messianic judgment as a time of blessing for themselves and destruction for the gentile oppressors. John, however, warned that Jewish ancestry was false security in the coming judgment (Lk 3:8); true repentance was the only means of escaping destruction (Mt 3:2). John anticipated this judgment at the hands of the Coming One, who would baptize the nation with “the Holy Spirit and with fire” (Lk 3:16). Fire represented the OT means of destruction in the end time (Mal 4:1) as well as purification (Mal 3:1-4), while the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the end time connoted blessing (Is 32:15; Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28) and purification (Is 4:2-4). The judgment anticipated by John was therefore twofold: destruction for the unrepentant, and blessing for the penitent and righteous (Mt 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>In light of this imminent event John called for repentance on the part of his listeners (Mt 3:2), a true “turning back” or “turning toward” God in obedience that would bring forgiveness of sin. Such a turnabout in an individual’s relation with God should be lived out in one’s everyday dealings: fairness on the part of tax collectors (Lk 3:12-13) and soldiers (v 14), and the general requirement of compassion for the poor (vv 10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsBaptism\">John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels record that John baptized those repentant of their sins at several locations: the Jordan River (Mk 1:5), Bethany beyond the Jordan (Jn 1:28), and Aenon near Salim (Jn 3:23). This practice was an integral part of John’s call for repentance, given in light of the approaching judgment and the appearance of the Coming One. The baptism of the penitent symbolized desire for forgiveness of sin, a renunciation of past life, and a desire to be included in the coming messianic kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>What was the background for John’s practice of baptism? From the OT we know of ceremonial lustrations or washings that guaranteed ritual purity (Lv 14–15; Nm 19). Unlike John’s baptism, these washings were repetitive in nature and referred predominantly to ritual rather than moral cleansing. The prophets, however, urged a moral purification associated with the washing of water (Is 1:16-18; Jer 4:14). More significantly, the prophets anticipated a cleansing by God in the end times preceding the Day of Judgment (Ez 36:25; Zec 13:1; cf. Is 44:3), an eschatological element that John may have assumed was being fulfilled in his water baptism.<\/p>\n<p>Another precedent for John’s practice may have been proselyte baptism, a rite (along with circumcision and the offering of sacrifices) that constituted the conversion of a Gentile to Judaism. Common to both proselyte baptism and John’s baptism were the emphasis on an ethical break with the past, a once-for-all character, and the similarity of immersion. Notable differences were that John’s baptism was for Jews, not Gentile converts, and that it had a marked eschatological character as a preparation for the new age. Unless John, in light of the imminence of the messianic age, consciously treated all Jews as “pagan” in need of a baptism of repentance (cf. Mt 3:7-10), it is doubtful that proselyte baptism formed the primary background for John’s baptismal ministry.<\/p>\n<p>If John’s baptism had a clear association with the forgiveness of sin, the question naturally arises as to why Jesus, the Son of God, sought baptism from John. John himself asks this very question of Jesus (Mt 3:14), to which Jesus responds, “It must be done, because we must do everything that is right” (v 15, <span>nlt<\/span>). First, it is clear that Jesus’ baptism represented an act of obedience on his part to God’s will as he saw it. Second, by submitting to the baptism of John, Jesus was clearly validating the ministry and message of John. The imminent coming of the kingdom and its Messiah, and the need for repentance in anticipation of this event that John proclaimed, were affirmed by Jesus through baptism. Third, by being baptized, Jesus condemned the self-righteous for their lack of repentance and took a stand with the penitent publicans and sinners awaiting the kingdom of God (Lk 7:29-30). Fourth, Jesus stepped forward for baptism not as an individual in need of forgiveness but as one who represented the people of God. His baptism, therefore, demonstrated solidarity with the people in their need of deliverance, even as he is judged in their place on the cross. Finally, the voice from heaven (Mk 1:11) and the descent of the Spirit (Lk 3:21-22) signify the inauguration of Jesus’ own ministry through his baptism by John.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsViewofJesus\">John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>Throughout his ministry John pointed beyond himself to one “who is far greater than I am—so much greater that I am not even worthy to be his slave” (Mk 1:7, <span>nlt<\/span>). His self-understanding apparently sprang from the application of Isaiah 40:3 to himself, that he was the preparer or forerunner for God’s coming activity through the Messiah (Lk 3:4-6). When asked by curious spectators, John firmly denied that he was the Messiah, and according to the Gospel accounts, subordinated himself to the Coming One (Mk 1:7-8; Jn 1:26-28; 3:28-31). The coming of Jesus to baptism seems to represent the first time John identified these expectations with Jesus himself (Jn 1:35-36). His recognition of Jesus as the Messiah prior to baptism (Mt 3:14) was confirmed by the descent of the Holy Spirit as a dove and the voice from heaven quoting a phrase from an OT messianic psalm (Mk 1:11a, from Ps 2:7), together with a phrase from a Suffering Servant song of Isaiah (Mk 1:11b, from Is 42:1). In the fourth Gospel, John the Baptist goes even further in acknowledging Jesus to be the “Lamb of God” (Jn 1:29), in anticipation of Jesus’ sacrificial role on the cross. And John recognized him as “God’s Chosen One” (v 34, <span>neb<\/span>—another term for the Messiah; Ps 2:7, see Mk 1:11).<\/p>\n<p>In light of John’s strong affirmation, it is at first difficult to understand his questioning of Jesus while imprisoned: “Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?” (Mt 11:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). Some have suggested that John was merely asking for the sake of his disciples, or that the question reflected John’s despondency with being imprisoned. It is more likely, however, that the question represents John’s own confusion with the activity expected of the Messiah. John had proclaimed a Coming One who would bring a baptism of fire and judgment upon the wicked (Lk 3:16). It may have been difficult for him to understand Jesus’ different emphases on forgiveness and acceptance of sinners (Mt 9:9-13) and his healing of the sick (Mt 8–9). When John’s disciples brought their master’s question to Jesus, asking whether or not he was the Messiah, Jesus responded by quoting Isaiah 35:5-6 (see also Is 61:1). This text proclaims the activities of healing and proclaiming salvation to the poor to be fulfillments of the Messiah’s role, even though they may not have been what John or countless other Jews expected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusViewofJohn\">Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>That Jesus highly regarded John the Baptist is indicated by his baptism by John. It is also explicitly stated on several occasions. Jesus called him the greatest man to have ever lived (Lk 7:28). (Of course, he was not as great as Jesus, the God-man.) Jesus also said that John was a burning and shining lamp (Jn 5:33-35) and that he practiced a baptism divinely ordained (Lk 20:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>John’s uniqueness, however, lies in the fact that he stood at the turning of the ages. He was the last of the old era, the period of the law and the prophets (Lk 16:16), which was to precede the coming of the messianic age (the kingdom of God). John was the last of the prophets, the greatest of them, the Elijah figure who would prepare the way for the judgment of God (Mt 11:13-15; Lk 1:17). Because John belonged to the era of the law and the prophets, however, he was not as great as the “least” already in the kingdom of God (Mt 11:11)—that is, those who belonged to the era of the kingdom’s appearance in Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ArrestImprisonmentandMartyrdom\">Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>To understand why John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas, one has to grasp the messianic excitement caused by John’s appearance and message (Lk 3:15-18). Herod and other secular rulers were obviously suspicious of anyone who might stir up the crowds with predictions of a coming messianic ruler. Other messianic movements had arisen before John, which resulted in outbreaks of violence against the Roman-Herodian rulership. Moreover, Herod Antipas was under heavy criticism for his marriage with Herodias, the ex-wife of his brother Philip. His first marriage, with the daughter of Aretus II, constituted a political alliance between the Herodian family and the Nabatean kingdom of Perea. His new relationship with Herodias was perceived as a breach of the political alliance and led to friction between the two families. John’s denunciation of Herod’s new marriage (Mt 14:3-12) could thus have been interpreted by Herod as a subversive rousing of sentiment against his authority. The Jewish historian Josephus states that Herod did, in fact, arrest John because he feared John’s influence over the crowds. According to Josephus, John was imprisoned at the fortress Machaerus on the eastern side of the Dead Sea. That he was not killed immediately was due to Herod’s personal fear of the righteous John (Mk 6:2) and of the people’s reaction (Mt 14:5). On a point about which Josephus is silent, the Gospels record that it was Herodias’s feelings against John (Mk 6:17) and her plot, through the dancing of her daughter, which brought about the beheading of John (vv 21-29). John was beheaded at Herodias’s request in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29 or 30.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheDisciplesofJohn\">The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p>While it is clear that a band of disciples formed around John in his lifetime (Jn 1:35), to suggest that he intended to begin a continuing movement is contradicted by his message on the imminent Day of Judgment. Apparently, John’s disciples consisted of a small group of those who had been baptized by him and were awaiting the coming Messiah. Some transferred their loyalty to Jesus after John had identified Jesus as the Coming One (Jn 1:37). Others, however, apparently stayed on with their teacher, communicating with the imprisoned John concerning the activities of Jesus (Lk 7:18-23) and, after his death, taking the body for burial (Mk 6:29).<\/p>\n<p>We know little about the activities and practices of the band of disciples clustered around John. We do know, however, that fasting was one practice specifically associated with the group, and one that marked them as similar to the Pharisees (Mt 9:14). In this practice they no doubt followed the example of John himself (Lk 7:33). Prayer and fasting were often linked in late Judaism. The disciples of John were also known for the prayers taught by their master (11:1). Seeing this practice, the disciples of Jesus asked the Lord to teach them to pray, to which Jesus responded with the Lord’s Prayer (vv 2-4).<\/p>\n<p>After his death it is likely that other disciples of John joined the followers of Jesus (see Lk 7:29-30). Not all did so, however, as disciples of John were encountered by Paul and other Christians approximately 25 years later in Ephesus (Acts 18:24–29:7). Upon hearing witness to Jesus, these followers of John proclaimed Jesus as Messiah. When Paul baptized them in the name of Jesus they received the Holy Spirit (19:4-7). Even so, it is apparent from later documents that various groups continued to honor John, even considering him the Messiah, centuries after the NT period.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOHN THE BAPTIST<\/h3>\n<p>Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29, while Jesus was still ministering.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>• Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>• John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>• Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>• The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BirthInfancyandBoyhood\">Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s Gospel is our only source of information concerning the birth and boyhood of John. The Gospel writer states that John was born in the hill country of Judah (Lk 1:39) of priestly descent, being the son of Zechariah, a priest of the order of Abijah, and Elizabeth, a descendant of Aaron (v 5). Both parents were righteous in the sight of God, following all the commandments closely (v 6). Like the birth of Jesus, only to a much lesser degree, the birth of John the Baptist is described in Luke as extraordinary. The angel Gabriel announced the coming birth to Zechariah in the temple; to the older, barren Elizabeth it came as an answer to prayer (vv 8-13). John’s name is announced to Zechariah by the angel, even as his purpose as forerunner is revealed before birth (vv 13-17). Such a consecration from birth is reminiscent of the call of the OT prophet Jeremiah (cf. Jer 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>There existed some familial relationship between the families of John and Jesus. Elizabeth is described as a relative of Mary (Lk 1:36), which may connote cousin or aunt, or may only mean being from the same tribe.<\/p>\n<p>John’s childhood, as that of Jesus, is left quite vague in the Gospel account. All that is said is that “John grew up and became strong in spirit. Then he lived out in the wilderness until he began his public ministry to Israel” (Lk 1:80, <span>nlt<\/span>). Some scholars have suggested that John might have been adopted as a boy by the Essenes (as was their practice) at Qumran and reared in their wilderness community, adjacent to the Dead Sea and near the Jordan River. There are some similarities between the activities of the Qumran sect, known through the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the later ministry of John the Baptist. Both practiced a type of asceticism and removed themselves from the life of Jerusalem. Both practiced baptism and associated this rite with initiation and repentance. Finally, John and the Qumran group were both eschatologically minded, awaiting God’s final end-time activity in history. Nevertheless, many significant differences exist between John and the Qumran sect.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AppearanceandIdentity\">Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>Mark’s Gospel begins with an account of John the Baptist’s appearance: “John the Baptist . . . lived in the wilderness and was preaching that people should be baptized to show that they had turned from their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Mk 1:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). A rich OT background lies behind John’s association with the wilderness, in this case the wilderness of Judea. It was in the wilderness that God revealed himself to Moses (Ex 3), gave the law, and entered into the covenant with Israel (ch 19). It was also the site of refuge for David (1 Sm 23–26; Ps 63) and Elijah (1 Kgs 19), and in this light became the anticipated site of God’s future deliverance (Is 40:3-5; Ez 47:1-12; Hos 2:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The unusual dress of John the Baptist—“clothing made of camel’s hair, with a leather belt around his waist” (Mk 1:6, <span>niv<\/span>)—may have suggested to his audience an association with Elijah in particular (2 Kgs 1:8) or with the prophets in general (Zec 13:4). His diet, “locusts and wild honey” (Mk 1:6), was Levitically clean, reflecting one who lived off the desert (such food was also eaten at Qumran) and formed part of the broader asceticism practiced by John and his disciples (Mt 9:14; 11:18).<\/p>\n<p>Who did John understand himself to be? In answer to questions by the multitude whether he was the Messiah, Elijah, or the expected prophet (Jn 1:20-23), John only identified himself as “a voice crying in the wilderness, ‘Prepare the way of the Lord’ ” (Is 40:3). The background for the question lies at the end of the OT period. Prophecy, on the one hand, was considered to have ceased (Zec 13:2-6); yet, on the other hand, it was expected to appear again before the coming of the messianic kingdom (see Jl 2:28-29; Mal 3:1-4). Some anticipated this final prophet to be one who was like Moses (Dt 18:15), others a returning Elijah as foretold in Malachi 4:5-6. While John personally refrained from identifying himself with these specific expectations (Jn 1:20-23), it is clear that his dress, lifestyle, and message caused the people to identify him with this end-time prophet (Mt 14:5; Mk 11:32). Jesus also saw John as this final “Elijah-like” prophet (Mt 11:7-15), who from Malachi’s prophecy was to be a forerunner to the coming of the Lord (Mal 3:1-4; 4:5-6).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsProclamation\">John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>John’s proclamation involved three elements: a warning of imminent judgment at the hands of the Coming One, a call for repentance in light of the coming kingdom of heaven, and a demand to express this repentance in concrete ethical terms. Many Jews looked forward confidently to the messianic judgment as a time of blessing for themselves and destruction for the gentile oppressors. John, however, warned that Jewish ancestry was false security in the coming judgment (Lk 3:8); true repentance was the only means of escaping destruction (Mt 3:2). John anticipated this judgment at the hands of the Coming One, who would baptize the nation with “the Holy Spirit and with fire” (Lk 3:16). Fire represented the OT means of destruction in the end time (Mal 4:1) as well as purification (Mal 3:1-4), while the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the end time connoted blessing (Is 32:15; Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28) and purification (Is 4:2-4). The judgment anticipated by John was therefore twofold: destruction for the unrepentant, and blessing for the penitent and righteous (Mt 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>In light of this imminent event John called for repentance on the part of his listeners (Mt 3:2), a true “turning back” or “turning toward” God in obedience that would bring forgiveness of sin. Such a turnabout in an individual’s relation with God should be lived out in one’s everyday dealings: fairness on the part of tax collectors (Lk 3:12-13) and soldiers (v 14), and the general requirement of compassion for the poor (vv 10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsBaptism\">John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels record that John baptized those repentant of their sins at several locations: the Jordan River (Mk 1:5), Bethany beyond the Jordan (Jn 1:28), and Aenon near Salim (Jn 3:23). This practice was an integral part of John’s call for repentance, given in light of the approaching judgment and the appearance of the Coming One. The baptism of the penitent symbolized desire for forgiveness of sin, a renunciation of past life, and a desire to be included in the coming messianic kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>What was the background for John’s practice of baptism? From the OT we know of ceremonial lustrations or washings that guaranteed ritual purity (Lv 14–15; Nm 19). Unlike John’s baptism, these washings were repetitive in nature and referred predominantly to ritual rather than moral cleansing. The prophets, however, urged a moral purification associated with the washing of water (Is 1:16-18; Jer 4:14). More significantly, the prophets anticipated a cleansing by God in the end times preceding the Day of Judgment (Ez 36:25; Zec 13:1; cf. Is 44:3), an eschatological element that John may have assumed was being fulfilled in his water baptism.<\/p>\n<p>Another precedent for John’s practice may have been proselyte baptism, a rite (along with circumcision and the offering of sacrifices) that constituted the conversion of a Gentile to Judaism. Common to both proselyte baptism and John’s baptism were the emphasis on an ethical break with the past, a once-for-all character, and the similarity of immersion. Notable differences were that John’s baptism was for Jews, not Gentile converts, and that it had a marked eschatological character as a preparation for the new age. Unless John, in light of the imminence of the messianic age, consciously treated all Jews as “pagan” in need of a baptism of repentance (cf. Mt 3:7-10), it is doubtful that proselyte baptism formed the primary background for John’s baptismal ministry.<\/p>\n<p>If John’s baptism had a clear association with the forgiveness of sin, the question naturally arises as to why Jesus, the Son of God, sought baptism from John. John himself asks this very question of Jesus (Mt 3:14), to which Jesus responds, “It must be done, because we must do everything that is right” (v 15, <span>nlt<\/span>). First, it is clear that Jesus’ baptism represented an act of obedience on his part to God’s will as he saw it. Second, by submitting to the baptism of John, Jesus was clearly validating the ministry and message of John. The imminent coming of the kingdom and its Messiah, and the need for repentance in anticipation of this event that John proclaimed, were affirmed by Jesus through baptism. Third, by being baptized, Jesus condemned the self-righteous for their lack of repentance and took a stand with the penitent publicans and sinners awaiting the kingdom of God (Lk 7:29-30). Fourth, Jesus stepped forward for baptism not as an individual in need of forgiveness but as one who represented the people of God. His baptism, therefore, demonstrated solidarity with the people in their need of deliverance, even as he is judged in their place on the cross. Finally, the voice from heaven (Mk 1:11) and the descent of the Spirit (Lk 3:21-22) signify the inauguration of Jesus’ own ministry through his baptism by John.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsViewofJesus\">John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>Throughout his ministry John pointed beyond himself to one “who is far greater than I am—so much greater that I am not even worthy to be his slave” (Mk 1:7, <span>nlt<\/span>). His self-understanding apparently sprang from the application of Isaiah 40:3 to himself, that he was the preparer or forerunner for God’s coming activity through the Messiah (Lk 3:4-6). When asked by curious spectators, John firmly denied that he was the Messiah, and according to the Gospel accounts, subordinated himself to the Coming One (Mk 1:7-8; Jn 1:26-28; 3:28-31). The coming of Jesus to baptism seems to represent the first time John identified these expectations with Jesus himself (Jn 1:35-36). His recognition of Jesus as the Messiah prior to baptism (Mt 3:14) was confirmed by the descent of the Holy Spirit as a dove and the voice from heaven quoting a phrase from an OT messianic psalm (Mk 1:11a, from Ps 2:7), together with a phrase from a Suffering Servant song of Isaiah (Mk 1:11b, from Is 42:1). In the fourth Gospel, John the Baptist goes even further in acknowledging Jesus to be the “Lamb of God” (Jn 1:29), in anticipation of Jesus’ sacrificial role on the cross. And John recognized him as “God’s Chosen One” (v 34, <span>neb<\/span>—another term for the Messiah; Ps 2:7, see Mk 1:11).<\/p>\n<p>In light of John’s strong affirmation, it is at first difficult to understand his questioning of Jesus while imprisoned: “Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?” (Mt 11:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). Some have suggested that John was merely asking for the sake of his disciples, or that the question reflected John’s despondency with being imprisoned. It is more likely, however, that the question represents John’s own confusion with the activity expected of the Messiah. John had proclaimed a Coming One who would bring a baptism of fire and judgment upon the wicked (Lk 3:16). It may have been difficult for him to understand Jesus’ different emphases on forgiveness and acceptance of sinners (Mt 9:9-13) and his healing of the sick (Mt 8–9). When John’s disciples brought their master’s question to Jesus, asking whether or not he was the Messiah, Jesus responded by quoting Isaiah 35:5-6 (see also Is 61:1). This text proclaims the activities of healing and proclaiming salvation to the poor to be fulfillments of the Messiah’s role, even though they may not have been what John or countless other Jews expected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusViewofJohn\">Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>That Jesus highly regarded John the Baptist is indicated by his baptism by John. It is also explicitly stated on several occasions. Jesus called him the greatest man to have ever lived (Lk 7:28). (Of course, he was not as great as Jesus, the God-man.) Jesus also said that John was a burning and shining lamp (Jn 5:33-35) and that he practiced a baptism divinely ordained (Lk 20:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>John’s uniqueness, however, lies in the fact that he stood at the turning of the ages. He was the last of the old era, the period of the law and the prophets (Lk 16:16), which was to precede the coming of the messianic age (the kingdom of God). John was the last of the prophets, the greatest of them, the Elijah figure who would prepare the way for the judgment of God (Mt 11:13-15; Lk 1:17). Because John belonged to the era of the law and the prophets, however, he was not as great as the “least” already in the kingdom of God (Mt 11:11)—that is, those who belonged to the era of the kingdom’s appearance in Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ArrestImprisonmentandMartyrdom\">Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>To understand why John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas, one has to grasp the messianic excitement caused by John’s appearance and message (Lk 3:15-18). Herod and other secular rulers were obviously suspicious of anyone who might stir up the crowds with predictions of a coming messianic ruler. Other messianic movements had arisen before John, which resulted in outbreaks of violence against the Roman-Herodian rulership. Moreover, Herod Antipas was under heavy criticism for his marriage with Herodias, the ex-wife of his brother Philip. His first marriage, with the daughter of Aretus II, constituted a political alliance between the Herodian family and the Nabatean kingdom of Perea. His new relationship with Herodias was perceived as a breach of the political alliance and led to friction between the two families. John’s denunciation of Herod’s new marriage (Mt 14:3-12) could thus have been interpreted by Herod as a subversive rousing of sentiment against his authority. The Jewish historian Josephus states that Herod did, in fact, arrest John because he feared John’s influence over the crowds. According to Josephus, John was imprisoned at the fortress Machaerus on the eastern side of the Dead Sea. That he was not killed immediately was due to Herod’s personal fear of the righteous John (Mk 6:2) and of the people’s reaction (Mt 14:5). On a point about which Josephus is silent, the Gospels record that it was Herodias’s feelings against John (Mk 6:17) and her plot, through the dancing of her daughter, which brought about the beheading of John (vv 21-29). John was beheaded at Herodias’s request in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29 or 30.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheDisciplesofJohn\">The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p>While it is clear that a band of disciples formed around John in his lifetime (Jn 1:35), to suggest that he intended to begin a continuing movement is contradicted by his message on the imminent Day of Judgment. Apparently, John’s disciples consisted of a small group of those who had been baptized by him and were awaiting the coming Messiah. Some transferred their loyalty to Jesus after John had identified Jesus as the Coming One (Jn 1:37). Others, however, apparently stayed on with their teacher, communicating with the imprisoned John concerning the activities of Jesus (Lk 7:18-23) and, after his death, taking the body for burial (Mk 6:29).<\/p>\n<p>We know little about the activities and practices of the band of disciples clustered around John. We do know, however, that fasting was one practice specifically associated with the group, and one that marked them as similar to the Pharisees (Mt 9:14). In this practice they no doubt followed the example of John himself (Lk 7:33). Prayer and fasting were often linked in late Judaism. The disciples of John were also known for the prayers taught by their master (11:1). Seeing this practice, the disciples of Jesus asked the Lord to teach them to pray, to which Jesus responded with the Lord’s Prayer (vv 2-4).<\/p>\n<p>After his death it is likely that other disciples of John joined the followers of Jesus (see Lk 7:29-30). Not all did so, however, as disciples of John were encountered by Paul and other Christians approximately 25 years later in Ephesus (Acts 18:24–29:7). Upon hearing witness to Jesus, these followers of John proclaimed Jesus as Messiah. When Paul baptized them in the name of Jesus they received the Holy Spirit (19:4-7). Even so, it is apparent from later documents that various groups continued to honor John, even considering him the Messiah, centuries after the NT period.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOHN THE BAPTIST Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately AD 29, while Jesus was still ministering. Preview • Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood • Appearance and Identity • John’s Proclamation • ...","summary_en":"JOHN THE BAPTIST Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately AD 29, while Jesus was still ministering. Preview • Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood • Appearance and Identity • John’s Proclamation • ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56322,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:20","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:20","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:20<\/strong> The Jews expected the <em>Messiah<\/em> (the Hebrew form of the Greek word <em>Christ<\/em>) to bring spiritual leadership and political redemption to Israel (see Deut 18:15; see also the Jewish intertestamental book <em>Psalms of Solomon<\/em>).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:20<\/strong> The Jews expected the <em>Messiah<\/em> (the Hebrew form of the Greek word <em>Christ<\/em>) to bring spiritual leadership and political redemption to Israel (see Deut 18:15; see also the Jewish intertestamental book <em>Psalms of Solomon<\/em>).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:20 The Jews expected the Messiah (the Hebrew form of the Greek word Christ) to bring spiritual leadership and political redemption to Israel (see Deut 18:15; see also the Jewish intertestamental book Psalms of Solomon).","summary_en":"1:20 The Jews expected the Messiah (the Hebrew form of the Greek word Christ) to bring spiritual leadership and political redemption to Israel (see Deut 18:15; see also the Jewish intertestamental book Psalms of Solomon).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83948,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:20","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:20","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:20<\/strong> The Jews expected the <em>Messiah<\/em> (the Hebrew form of the Greek word <em>Christ<\/em>) to bring spiritual leadership and political redemption to Israel (see Deut 18:15; see also the Jewish intertestamental book <em>Psalms of Solomon<\/em>).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:20<\/strong> The Jews expected the <em>Messiah<\/em> (the Hebrew form of the Greek word <em>Christ<\/em>) to bring spiritual leadership and political redemption to Israel (see Deut 18:15; see also the Jewish intertestamental book <em>Psalms of Solomon<\/em>).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:20 The Jews expected the Messiah (the Hebrew form of the Greek word Christ) to bring spiritual leadership and political redemption to Israel (see Deut 18:15; see also the Jewish intertestamental book Psalms of Solomon).","summary_en":"1:20 The Jews expected the Messiah (the Hebrew form of the Greek word Christ) to bring spiritual leadership and political redemption to Israel (see Deut 18:15; see also the Jewish intertestamental book Psalms of Solomon).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111574,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:20","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:20","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:20<\/strong> The Jews expected the <em>Messiah<\/em> (the Hebrew form of the Greek word <em>Christ<\/em>) to bring spiritual leadership and political redemption to Israel (see Deut 18:15; see also the Jewish intertestamental book <em>Psalms of Solomon<\/em>).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:20<\/strong> The Jews expected the <em>Messiah<\/em> (the Hebrew form of the Greek word <em>Christ<\/em>) to bring spiritual leadership and political redemption to Israel (see Deut 18:15; see also the Jewish intertestamental book <em>Psalms of Solomon<\/em>).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:20 The Jews expected the Messiah (the Hebrew form of the Greek word Christ) to bring spiritual leadership and political redemption to Israel (see Deut 18:15; see also the Jewish intertestamental book Psalms of Solomon).","summary_en":"1:20 The Jews expected the Messiah (the Hebrew form of the Greek word Christ) to bring spiritual leadership and political redemption to Israel (see Deut 18:15; see also the Jewish intertestamental book Psalms of Solomon).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139200,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:20","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:20","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:20<\/strong> The Jews expected the <em>Messiah<\/em> (the Hebrew form of the Greek word <em>Christ<\/em>) to bring spiritual leadership and political redemption to Israel (see Deut 18:15; see also the Jewish intertestamental book <em>Psalms of Solomon<\/em>).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:20<\/strong> The Jews expected the <em>Messiah<\/em> (the Hebrew form of the Greek word <em>Christ<\/em>) to bring spiritual leadership and political redemption to Israel (see Deut 18:15; see also the Jewish intertestamental book <em>Psalms of Solomon<\/em>).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:20 The Jews expected the Messiah (the Hebrew form of the Greek word Christ) to bring spiritual leadership and political redemption to Israel (see Deut 18:15; see also the Jewish intertestamental book Psalms of Solomon).","summary_en":"1:20 The Jews expected the Messiah (the Hebrew form of the Greek word Christ) to bring spiritual leadership and political redemption to Israel (see Deut 18:15; see also the Jewish intertestamental book Psalms of Solomon).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"21":[{"id":56323,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:21","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:21","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:21<\/strong> <em>Elijah<\/em> was to be the Messiah’s forerunner (Mal 4:5). John the Baptist fulfilled the forerunner’s role, though he denied being the prophet Elijah (see Matt 11:14; Luke 1:17). • <em>Are you the Prophet we are expecting?<\/em> Cp. John 6:14; 7:40-41.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:21<\/strong> <em>Elijah<\/em> was to be the Messiah’s forerunner (Mal 4:5). John the Baptist fulfilled the forerunner’s role, though he denied being the prophet Elijah (see Matt 11:14; Luke 1:17). • <em>Are you the Prophet we are expecting?<\/em> Cp. John 6:14; 7:40-41.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:21 Elijah was to be the Messiah’s forerunner (Mal 4:5). John the Baptist fulfilled the forerunner’s role, though he denied being the prophet Elijah (see Matt 11:14; Luke 1:17). • Are you the Prophet we are expecting? Cp. John 6:14; 7:40-41.","summary_en":"1:21 Elijah was to be the Messiah’s forerunner (Mal 4:5). John the Baptist fulfilled the forerunner’s role, though he denied being the prophet Elijah (see Matt 11:14; Luke 1:17). • Are you the Prophet we are expecting? Cp. John 6:14; 7:40-41.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83949,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:21","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:21","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:21<\/strong> <em>Elijah<\/em> was to be the Messiah’s forerunner (Mal 4:5). John the Baptist fulfilled the forerunner’s role, though he denied being the prophet Elijah (see Matt 11:14; Luke 1:17). • <em>Are you the Prophet we are expecting?<\/em> Cp. John 6:14; 7:40-41.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:21<\/strong> <em>Elijah<\/em> was to be the Messiah’s forerunner (Mal 4:5). John the Baptist fulfilled the forerunner’s role, though he denied being the prophet Elijah (see Matt 11:14; Luke 1:17). • <em>Are you the Prophet we are expecting?<\/em> Cp. John 6:14; 7:40-41.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:21 Elijah was to be the Messiah’s forerunner (Mal 4:5). John the Baptist fulfilled the forerunner’s role, though he denied being the prophet Elijah (see Matt 11:14; Luke 1:17). • Are you the Prophet we are expecting? Cp. John 6:14; 7:40-41.","summary_en":"1:21 Elijah was to be the Messiah’s forerunner (Mal 4:5). John the Baptist fulfilled the forerunner’s role, though he denied being the prophet Elijah (see Matt 11:14; Luke 1:17). • Are you the Prophet we are expecting? Cp. John 6:14; 7:40-41.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111575,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:21","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:21","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:21<\/strong> <em>Elijah<\/em> was to be the Messiah’s forerunner (Mal 4:5). John the Baptist fulfilled the forerunner’s role, though he denied being the prophet Elijah (see Matt 11:14; Luke 1:17). • <em>Are you the Prophet we are expecting?<\/em> Cp. John 6:14; 7:40-41.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:21<\/strong> <em>Elijah<\/em> was to be the Messiah’s forerunner (Mal 4:5). John the Baptist fulfilled the forerunner’s role, though he denied being the prophet Elijah (see Matt 11:14; Luke 1:17). • <em>Are you the Prophet we are expecting?<\/em> Cp. John 6:14; 7:40-41.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:21 Elijah was to be the Messiah’s forerunner (Mal 4:5). John the Baptist fulfilled the forerunner’s role, though he denied being the prophet Elijah (see Matt 11:14; Luke 1:17). • Are you the Prophet we are expecting? Cp. John 6:14; 7:40-41.","summary_en":"1:21 Elijah was to be the Messiah’s forerunner (Mal 4:5). John the Baptist fulfilled the forerunner’s role, though he denied being the prophet Elijah (see Matt 11:14; Luke 1:17). • Are you the Prophet we are expecting? Cp. John 6:14; 7:40-41.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139201,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:21","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:21","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:21<\/strong> <em>Elijah<\/em> was to be the Messiah’s forerunner (Mal 4:5). John the Baptist fulfilled the forerunner’s role, though he denied being the prophet Elijah (see Matt 11:14; Luke 1:17). • <em>Are you the Prophet we are expecting?<\/em> Cp. John 6:14; 7:40-41.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:21<\/strong> <em>Elijah<\/em> was to be the Messiah’s forerunner (Mal 4:5). John the Baptist fulfilled the forerunner’s role, though he denied being the prophet Elijah (see Matt 11:14; Luke 1:17). • <em>Are you the Prophet we are expecting?<\/em> Cp. John 6:14; 7:40-41.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:21 Elijah was to be the Messiah’s forerunner (Mal 4:5). John the Baptist fulfilled the forerunner’s role, though he denied being the prophet Elijah (see Matt 11:14; Luke 1:17). • Are you the Prophet we are expecting? Cp. John 6:14; 7:40-41.","summary_en":"1:21 Elijah was to be the Messiah’s forerunner (Mal 4:5). John the Baptist fulfilled the forerunner’s role, though he denied being the prophet Elijah (see Matt 11:14; Luke 1:17). • Are you the Prophet we are expecting? Cp. John 6:14; 7:40-41.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"22":[{"id":56324,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:22","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:22","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:22-23<\/strong> <em>Then who are you?<\/em> John the Baptist simply wanted to be known as <em>a voice shouting in the wilderness<\/em> (see Isa 40:3).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:22-23<\/strong> <em>Then who are you?<\/em> John the Baptist simply wanted to be known as <em>a voice shouting in the wilderness<\/em> (see Isa 40:3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:22-23 Then who are you? John the Baptist simply wanted to be known as a voice shouting in the wilderness (see Isa 40:3).","summary_en":"1:22-23 Then who are you? John the Baptist simply wanted to be known as a voice shouting in the wilderness (see Isa 40:3).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83950,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:22","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:22","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:22-23<\/strong> <em>Then who are you?<\/em> John the Baptist simply wanted to be known as <em>a voice shouting in the wilderness<\/em> (see Isa 40:3).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:22-23<\/strong> <em>Then who are you?<\/em> John the Baptist simply wanted to be known as <em>a voice shouting in the wilderness<\/em> (see Isa 40:3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:22-23 Then who are you? John the Baptist simply wanted to be known as a voice shouting in the wilderness (see Isa 40:3).","summary_en":"1:22-23 Then who are you? John the Baptist simply wanted to be known as a voice shouting in the wilderness (see Isa 40:3).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111576,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:22","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:22","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:22-23<\/strong> <em>Then who are you?<\/em> John the Baptist simply wanted to be known as <em>a voice shouting in the wilderness<\/em> (see Isa 40:3).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:22-23<\/strong> <em>Then who are you?<\/em> John the Baptist simply wanted to be known as <em>a voice shouting in the wilderness<\/em> (see Isa 40:3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:22-23 Then who are you? John the Baptist simply wanted to be known as a voice shouting in the wilderness (see Isa 40:3).","summary_en":"1:22-23 Then who are you? John the Baptist simply wanted to be known as a voice shouting in the wilderness (see Isa 40:3).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139202,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:22","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:22","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:22-23<\/strong> <em>Then who are you?<\/em> John the Baptist simply wanted to be known as <em>a voice shouting in the wilderness<\/em> (see Isa 40:3).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:22-23<\/strong> <em>Then who are you?<\/em> John the Baptist simply wanted to be known as <em>a voice shouting in the wilderness<\/em> (see Isa 40:3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:22-23 Then who are you? John the Baptist simply wanted to be known as a voice shouting in the wilderness (see Isa 40:3).","summary_en":"1:22-23 Then who are you? John the Baptist simply wanted to be known as a voice shouting in the wilderness (see Isa 40:3).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"23":[{"id":41890,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Isaiah","title_en":"Isaiah","content_ro":"<h3>Isaiah<\/h3>\n<p>Isaiah was a Judean prophet during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. He was the son of Amoz (Isa 1:1) and was possibly related to King Amaziah. He lived in Jerusalem, was well educated, and had deep insight into human nature. He had a long ministry (about 740~685 BC); as Judah’s political and religious counselor, he had access to kings and was apparently the court historian (2 Chr 26:22; 32:32). Isaiah’s wife was called a “prophetess” (see Study Note on Isa 8:3); their sons were Shear-jashub (7:3) and Maher-shalal-hash-baz (8:3).<\/p>\n<p>Isaiah opposed social and political evil at all levels. He censured fortune-tellers. He rebuked kings for their willfulness and indifference. He denounced wealthy, influential people who ignored their responsibilities. And he exhorted everyone to obey God’s covenant. Isaiah opposed Canaanite idolatry and insincere religious observances (1:10-17; 29:13), proclaiming judgment and declaring that only a righteous remnant would survive (6:11-13). He foretold the coming Messiah, the peaceful prince of God’s kingdom (9:6-7; 11:1-11) who was also an obedient, suffering servant (53:3-12). The book of Isaiah has more overtones of the New Testament than any other Old Testament book and is frequently cited by New Testament authors.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Kgs 19:1–20:19; 2 Chr 26:22; 32:20, 32; Isa 1:1–66:24; Matt 3:3; 4:14-16; 8:17; 12:17-21; 13:14-15; 15:7-9; Mark 1:2-3; 7:6-7; Luke 3:4-6; 4:17-19; John 1:23; 12:38-41; Acts 8:28-34; 28:25-27; Rom 9:27-29; 10:15-16, 20-21; 15:12; Gal 4:27<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Isaiah<\/h3>\n<p>Isaiah was a Judean prophet during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. He was the son of Amoz (Isa 1:1) and was possibly related to King Amaziah. He lived in Jerusalem, was well educated, and had deep insight into human nature. He had a long ministry (about 740~685 BC); as Judah’s political and religious counselor, he had access to kings and was apparently the court historian (2 Chr 26:22; 32:32). Isaiah’s wife was called a “prophetess” (see Study Note on Isa 8:3); their sons were Shear-jashub (7:3) and Maher-shalal-hash-baz (8:3).<\/p>\n<p>Isaiah opposed social and political evil at all levels. He censured fortune-tellers. He rebuked kings for their willfulness and indifference. He denounced wealthy, influential people who ignored their responsibilities. And he exhorted everyone to obey God’s covenant. Isaiah opposed Canaanite idolatry and insincere religious observances (1:10-17; 29:13), proclaiming judgment and declaring that only a righteous remnant would survive (6:11-13). He foretold the coming Messiah, the peaceful prince of God’s kingdom (9:6-7; 11:1-11) who was also an obedient, suffering servant (53:3-12). The book of Isaiah has more overtones of the New Testament than any other Old Testament book and is frequently cited by New Testament authors.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Kgs 19:1–20:19; 2 Chr 26:22; 32:20, 32; Isa 1:1–66:24; Matt 3:3; 4:14-16; 8:17; 12:17-21; 13:14-15; 15:7-9; Mark 1:2-3; 7:6-7; Luke 3:4-6; 4:17-19; John 1:23; 12:38-41; Acts 8:28-34; 28:25-27; Rom 9:27-29; 10:15-16, 20-21; 15:12; Gal 4:27<\/p>","summary_ro":"Isaiah Isaiah was a Judean prophet during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. He was the son of Amoz (Isa 1:1) and was possibly related to King Amaziah. He lived in Jerusalem, was well educated, and had deep insight into human nature. He had a long ministry (about 740~685 BC); as Judah’s political and religious counselor, he had access to kings and was apparently the court historian (2 Chr 26:22; 32:32). Isaiah’s wife was called a “prophetess” (see Study Note on Isa 8:3); their ...","summary_en":"Isaiah Isaiah was a Judean prophet during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. He was the son of Amoz (Isa 1:1) and was possibly related to King Amaziah. He lived in Jerusalem, was well educated, and had deep insight into human nature. He had a long ministry (about 740~685 BC); as Judah’s political and religious counselor, he had access to kings and was apparently the court historian (2 Chr 26:22; 32:32). Isaiah’s wife was called a “prophetess” (see Study Note on Isa 8:3); their ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69516,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Isaiah","title_en":"Isaiah","content_ro":"<h3>Isaiah<\/h3>\n<p>Isaiah was a Judean prophet during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. He was the son of Amoz (Isa 1:1) and was possibly related to King Amaziah. He lived in Jerusalem, was well educated, and had deep insight into human nature. He had a long ministry (about 740~685 BC); as Judah’s political and religious counselor, he had access to kings and was apparently the court historian (2 Chr 26:22; 32:32). Isaiah’s wife was called a “prophetess” (see Study Note on Isa 8:3); their sons were Shear-jashub (7:3) and Maher-shalal-hash-baz (8:3).<\/p>\n<p>Isaiah opposed social and political evil at all levels. He censured fortune-tellers. He rebuked kings for their willfulness and indifference. He denounced wealthy, influential people who ignored their responsibilities. And he exhorted everyone to obey God’s covenant. Isaiah opposed Canaanite idolatry and insincere religious observances (1:10-17; 29:13), proclaiming judgment and declaring that only a righteous remnant would survive (6:11-13). He foretold the coming Messiah, the peaceful prince of God’s kingdom (9:6-7; 11:1-11) who was also an obedient, suffering servant (53:3-12). The book of Isaiah has more overtones of the New Testament than any other Old Testament book and is frequently cited by New Testament authors.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Kgs 19:1–20:19; 2 Chr 26:22; 32:20, 32; Isa 1:1–66:24; Matt 3:3; 4:14-16; 8:17; 12:17-21; 13:14-15; 15:7-9; Mark 1:2-3; 7:6-7; Luke 3:4-6; 4:17-19; John 1:23; 12:38-41; Acts 8:28-34; 28:25-27; Rom 9:27-29; 10:15-16, 20-21; 15:12; Gal 4:27<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Isaiah<\/h3>\n<p>Isaiah was a Judean prophet during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. He was the son of Amoz (Isa 1:1) and was possibly related to King Amaziah. He lived in Jerusalem, was well educated, and had deep insight into human nature. He had a long ministry (about 740~685 BC); as Judah’s political and religious counselor, he had access to kings and was apparently the court historian (2 Chr 26:22; 32:32). Isaiah’s wife was called a “prophetess” (see Study Note on Isa 8:3); their sons were Shear-jashub (7:3) and Maher-shalal-hash-baz (8:3).<\/p>\n<p>Isaiah opposed social and political evil at all levels. He censured fortune-tellers. He rebuked kings for their willfulness and indifference. He denounced wealthy, influential people who ignored their responsibilities. And he exhorted everyone to obey God’s covenant. Isaiah opposed Canaanite idolatry and insincere religious observances (1:10-17; 29:13), proclaiming judgment and declaring that only a righteous remnant would survive (6:11-13). He foretold the coming Messiah, the peaceful prince of God’s kingdom (9:6-7; 11:1-11) who was also an obedient, suffering servant (53:3-12). The book of Isaiah has more overtones of the New Testament than any other Old Testament book and is frequently cited by New Testament authors.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Kgs 19:1–20:19; 2 Chr 26:22; 32:20, 32; Isa 1:1–66:24; Matt 3:3; 4:14-16; 8:17; 12:17-21; 13:14-15; 15:7-9; Mark 1:2-3; 7:6-7; Luke 3:4-6; 4:17-19; John 1:23; 12:38-41; Acts 8:28-34; 28:25-27; Rom 9:27-29; 10:15-16, 20-21; 15:12; Gal 4:27<\/p>","summary_ro":"Isaiah Isaiah was a Judean prophet during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. He was the son of Amoz (Isa 1:1) and was possibly related to King Amaziah. He lived in Jerusalem, was well educated, and had deep insight into human nature. He had a long ministry (about 740~685 BC); as Judah’s political and religious counselor, he had access to kings and was apparently the court historian (2 Chr 26:22; 32:32). Isaiah’s wife was called a “prophetess” (see Study Note on Isa 8:3); their ...","summary_en":"Isaiah Isaiah was a Judean prophet during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. He was the son of Amoz (Isa 1:1) and was possibly related to King Amaziah. He lived in Jerusalem, was well educated, and had deep insight into human nature. He had a long ministry (about 740~685 BC); as Judah’s political and religious counselor, he had access to kings and was apparently the court historian (2 Chr 26:22; 32:32). Isaiah’s wife was called a “prophetess” (see Study Note on Isa 8:3); their ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97142,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Isaiah","title_en":"Isaiah","content_ro":"<h3>Isaiah<\/h3>\n<p>Isaiah was a Judean prophet during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. He was the son of Amoz (Isa 1:1) and was possibly related to King Amaziah. He lived in Jerusalem, was well educated, and had deep insight into human nature. He had a long ministry (about 740~685 BC); as Judah’s political and religious counselor, he had access to kings and was apparently the court historian (2 Chr 26:22; 32:32). Isaiah’s wife was called a “prophetess” (see Study Note on Isa 8:3); their sons were Shear-jashub (7:3) and Maher-shalal-hash-baz (8:3).<\/p>\n<p>Isaiah opposed social and political evil at all levels. He censured fortune-tellers. He rebuked kings for their willfulness and indifference. He denounced wealthy, influential people who ignored their responsibilities. And he exhorted everyone to obey God’s covenant. Isaiah opposed Canaanite idolatry and insincere religious observances (1:10-17; 29:13), proclaiming judgment and declaring that only a righteous remnant would survive (6:11-13). He foretold the coming Messiah, the peaceful prince of God’s kingdom (9:6-7; 11:1-11) who was also an obedient, suffering servant (53:3-12). The book of Isaiah has more overtones of the New Testament than any other Old Testament book and is frequently cited by New Testament authors.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Kgs 19:1–20:19; 2 Chr 26:22; 32:20, 32; Isa 1:1–66:24; Matt 3:3; 4:14-16; 8:17; 12:17-21; 13:14-15; 15:7-9; Mark 1:2-3; 7:6-7; Luke 3:4-6; 4:17-19; John 1:23; 12:38-41; Acts 8:28-34; 28:25-27; Rom 9:27-29; 10:15-16, 20-21; 15:12; Gal 4:27<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Isaiah<\/h3>\n<p>Isaiah was a Judean prophet during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. He was the son of Amoz (Isa 1:1) and was possibly related to King Amaziah. He lived in Jerusalem, was well educated, and had deep insight into human nature. He had a long ministry (about 740~685 BC); as Judah’s political and religious counselor, he had access to kings and was apparently the court historian (2 Chr 26:22; 32:32). Isaiah’s wife was called a “prophetess” (see Study Note on Isa 8:3); their sons were Shear-jashub (7:3) and Maher-shalal-hash-baz (8:3).<\/p>\n<p>Isaiah opposed social and political evil at all levels. He censured fortune-tellers. He rebuked kings for their willfulness and indifference. He denounced wealthy, influential people who ignored their responsibilities. And he exhorted everyone to obey God’s covenant. Isaiah opposed Canaanite idolatry and insincere religious observances (1:10-17; 29:13), proclaiming judgment and declaring that only a righteous remnant would survive (6:11-13). He foretold the coming Messiah, the peaceful prince of God’s kingdom (9:6-7; 11:1-11) who was also an obedient, suffering servant (53:3-12). The book of Isaiah has more overtones of the New Testament than any other Old Testament book and is frequently cited by New Testament authors.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Kgs 19:1–20:19; 2 Chr 26:22; 32:20, 32; Isa 1:1–66:24; Matt 3:3; 4:14-16; 8:17; 12:17-21; 13:14-15; 15:7-9; Mark 1:2-3; 7:6-7; Luke 3:4-6; 4:17-19; John 1:23; 12:38-41; Acts 8:28-34; 28:25-27; Rom 9:27-29; 10:15-16, 20-21; 15:12; Gal 4:27<\/p>","summary_ro":"Isaiah Isaiah was a Judean prophet during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. He was the son of Amoz (Isa 1:1) and was possibly related to King Amaziah. He lived in Jerusalem, was well educated, and had deep insight into human nature. He had a long ministry (about 740~685 BC); as Judah’s political and religious counselor, he had access to kings and was apparently the court historian (2 Chr 26:22; 32:32). Isaiah’s wife was called a “prophetess” (see Study Note on Isa 8:3); their ...","summary_en":"Isaiah Isaiah was a Judean prophet during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. He was the son of Amoz (Isa 1:1) and was possibly related to King Amaziah. He lived in Jerusalem, was well educated, and had deep insight into human nature. He had a long ministry (about 740~685 BC); as Judah’s political and religious counselor, he had access to kings and was apparently the court historian (2 Chr 26:22; 32:32). Isaiah’s wife was called a “prophetess” (see Study Note on Isa 8:3); their ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":124768,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Isaiah","title_en":"Isaiah","content_ro":"<h3>Isaiah<\/h3>\n<p>Isaiah was a Judean prophet during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. He was the son of Amoz (Isa 1:1) and was possibly related to King Amaziah. He lived in Jerusalem, was well educated, and had deep insight into human nature. He had a long ministry (about 740~685 BC); as Judah’s political and religious counselor, he had access to kings and was apparently the court historian (2 Chr 26:22; 32:32). Isaiah’s wife was called a “prophetess” (see Study Note on Isa 8:3); their sons were Shear-jashub (7:3) and Maher-shalal-hash-baz (8:3).<\/p>\n<p>Isaiah opposed social and political evil at all levels. He censured fortune-tellers. He rebuked kings for their willfulness and indifference. He denounced wealthy, influential people who ignored their responsibilities. And he exhorted everyone to obey God’s covenant. Isaiah opposed Canaanite idolatry and insincere religious observances (1:10-17; 29:13), proclaiming judgment and declaring that only a righteous remnant would survive (6:11-13). He foretold the coming Messiah, the peaceful prince of God’s kingdom (9:6-7; 11:1-11) who was also an obedient, suffering servant (53:3-12). The book of Isaiah has more overtones of the New Testament than any other Old Testament book and is frequently cited by New Testament authors.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Kgs 19:1–20:19; 2 Chr 26:22; 32:20, 32; Isa 1:1–66:24; Matt 3:3; 4:14-16; 8:17; 12:17-21; 13:14-15; 15:7-9; Mark 1:2-3; 7:6-7; Luke 3:4-6; 4:17-19; John 1:23; 12:38-41; Acts 8:28-34; 28:25-27; Rom 9:27-29; 10:15-16, 20-21; 15:12; Gal 4:27<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Isaiah<\/h3>\n<p>Isaiah was a Judean prophet during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. He was the son of Amoz (Isa 1:1) and was possibly related to King Amaziah. He lived in Jerusalem, was well educated, and had deep insight into human nature. He had a long ministry (about 740~685 BC); as Judah’s political and religious counselor, he had access to kings and was apparently the court historian (2 Chr 26:22; 32:32). Isaiah’s wife was called a “prophetess” (see Study Note on Isa 8:3); their sons were Shear-jashub (7:3) and Maher-shalal-hash-baz (8:3).<\/p>\n<p>Isaiah opposed social and political evil at all levels. He censured fortune-tellers. He rebuked kings for their willfulness and indifference. He denounced wealthy, influential people who ignored their responsibilities. And he exhorted everyone to obey God’s covenant. Isaiah opposed Canaanite idolatry and insincere religious observances (1:10-17; 29:13), proclaiming judgment and declaring that only a righteous remnant would survive (6:11-13). He foretold the coming Messiah, the peaceful prince of God’s kingdom (9:6-7; 11:1-11) who was also an obedient, suffering servant (53:3-12). The book of Isaiah has more overtones of the New Testament than any other Old Testament book and is frequently cited by New Testament authors.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Kgs 19:1–20:19; 2 Chr 26:22; 32:20, 32; Isa 1:1–66:24; Matt 3:3; 4:14-16; 8:17; 12:17-21; 13:14-15; 15:7-9; Mark 1:2-3; 7:6-7; Luke 3:4-6; 4:17-19; John 1:23; 12:38-41; Acts 8:28-34; 28:25-27; Rom 9:27-29; 10:15-16, 20-21; 15:12; Gal 4:27<\/p>","summary_ro":"Isaiah Isaiah was a Judean prophet during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. He was the son of Amoz (Isa 1:1) and was possibly related to King Amaziah. He lived in Jerusalem, was well educated, and had deep insight into human nature. He had a long ministry (about 740~685 BC); as Judah’s political and religious counselor, he had access to kings and was apparently the court historian (2 Chr 26:22; 32:32). Isaiah’s wife was called a “prophetess” (see Study Note on Isa 8:3); their ...","summary_en":"Isaiah Isaiah was a Judean prophet during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. He was the son of Amoz (Isa 1:1) and was possibly related to King Amaziah. He lived in Jerusalem, was well educated, and had deep insight into human nature. He had a long ministry (about 740~685 BC); as Judah’s political and religious counselor, he had access to kings and was apparently the court historian (2 Chr 26:22; 32:32). Isaiah’s wife was called a “prophetess” (see Study Note on Isa 8:3); their ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":4710,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"and Text of the (New Testament) Bible*, Manuscripts","title_en":"and Text of the (New Testament) Bible*, Manuscripts","content_ro":"<h3>BIBLE*, M<span>anuscripts and Text of the (New Testament)<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Copies of the NT books produced by scribes and editions made from these copies. In the centuries prior to the simultaneous-multiple production of copies via dictation (wherein many scribes in a scriptorium transcribed a text dictated to them by one reader), all manuscript copies were made singly—each scribe producing a copy from an exemplar.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the 15th century, when Johannes Gutenberg invented movable type for the printing press, all copies of any work of literature were made by hand (hence, the name “manuscript”). According to a current tabulation, there are 99 papyrus manuscripts, 257 uncial manuscripts, and 2,795 minuscule manuscripts. We can add 2,209 Greek lectionaries to this list. Therefore, we have over 5,350 manuscript copies of the Greek NT or portions thereof. No other work of Greek literature can boast of such numbers.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Important Papyrus Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>• Important Uncial Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>• The Text of the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ImportantPapyrusManuscripts\">Important Papyrus Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>Papyrus is a tall, aquatic reed, the pith of which is cut into strips, laid in a crosswork pattern and glued together to make a page for writing. The papyrus rolls of Egypt have been used as a writing surface since the early third millennium <span>BC<\/span>. The Greeks adopted papyrus around 900 <span>BC<\/span>, and later the Romans adopted its use. However, the oldest extant Greek rolls of papyrus date from the fourth century <span>BC<\/span>. Unfortunately, papyrus is perishable, requiring a dry climate for its preservation. That is why so many papyri have been discovered in the desert sands of Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>The NT papyrus manuscripts (abbreviated as “P”) are generally the earliest manuscripts of the NT. Broadly speaking, the most important ones can be categorized in three groups: the Oxyrhynchus Papyri (from Oxyrhynchus, Egypt), (2) the Beatty Papyri (named after the owner); and (3) the Bodmer Papyri (named after the owner).<\/p>\n<h5>The Oxyrhynchus Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>Beginning in 1898 B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt discovered thousands of papyrus fragments in the ancient rubbish heaps of Oxyrhynchus, Egypt. This site yielded volumes of papyrus fragments containing all sorts of written material (literature, business and legal contracts, letters, etc.) as well as over 40 manuscripts containing portions of the NT. Some of the more noteworthy papyrus manuscripts from Oxyrhynchus are as follows:<\/p>\n<h6>P1 (P. Oxy. 2)<\/h6>\n<p>This late second-century manuscript contains Matthew 1:1-9, 12, 14-20. Grenfell and Hunt in the winter of 1896–97 went to Oxyrhynchus (now called El Bahnasa) in search of ancient Christian documents. P1 was discovered on the second day of the dig. At the time of this discovery, this was the earliest extant copy of any NT portion—at least 100 years earlier than Codex Vaticanus. The copyist of P1 seems to have faithfully followed a very reliable exemplar. Where there are major variants, P1 agrees with the best Alexandrian witnesses, especially B (Codex Vaticanus), from which it rarely varies.<\/p>\n<h6>P5 (P. Oxy. 208 and 1781)<\/h6>\n<p>Two separate portions of this third-century manuscript were unearthed from Oxyrhynchus by Grenfell and Hunt, both from the same papyrus manuscript. The first portion contains John 1:23-31, 33-40 on one fragment and John 20:11-17 on another—probably on the first and last quires of a manuscript containing only the Gospel of John. This portion was published in volume II of <em>Oxyrhynchus Papyri<\/em> in 1899; the second portion—containing John 16:14-30—was not published until 1922 in volume XV of <em>Oxyrhynchus Papyri.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>After examining the first portion, Grenfell and Hunt said, “The text is a good one, and appears to have affinities with that of Codex Sinaiticus, with which the papyrus agrees in several readings not found elsewhere.” The papyrus, written in a documentary hand, is marked for its brevity.<\/p>\n<h6>P13 (P. Oxy. 657 and PSI 1292)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated between 175 and 225, contains 12 columns from a roll preserving the text of Hebrews 2:14–5:5; 10:8-22; 10:29–11:13; 11:28–12:7. The text of Hebrews was written in a reformed documentary hand on the back of the papyrus containing the new epitome of Livy. For this reason, some scholars think the manuscript was possibly brought to Egpyt by a Roman official and left behind when he left his post. P13 very often agrees with B, and it supplements B where it is lacking—namely, from Hebrews 9:14 to the end of Hebrews. P13 and P46 display nearly the same text. Out of a total of 88 variation-units, there are 71 agreements and only 17 disagreements.<\/p>\n<h6>P77 (P. Oxy. 2683 + 4405)<\/h6>\n<p>Dated c. 150–75, this is the earliest manuscript of Matthew (23:30-39). The manuscript is clearly a literary production. It was written in an elegant hand and has what was or became a standard system of chapter division, as well as punctuation and breathing marks. P77 has close textual affinities with Codex Sinaiticus.<\/p>\n<h6>P90 (P. Oxy. 3523)<\/h6>\n<p>This second-century manuscript (c. 150–75) contains John 18:36–19:7. The handwriting (an upright, rounded, elegant script) is much like that found in P66. Furthermore, P90 has more affinity with P66 than with any other single manuscript, though it does not concur with P66 in its entirety.<\/p>\n\n<h6>P. Oxy. 4404<\/h6>\n<p>Containing Matthew 21:34-37, 43, 45, this manuscript could be the earliest extant manuscript of the NT in that the script is early Roman and therefore could be dated to the early second century.<\/p>\n<h5>The Chester Beatty Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>These manuscripts were purchased from a dealer in Egypt during the 1930s by Chester Beatty and by the University of Michigan. The three manuscripts in this collection are very early and contain a large portion of the NT text. P45 (c. 200) contains portions of all four Gospels and Acts; P46 (c. 125) has almost all of Paul’s epistles and Hebrews; and P47 (third century) contains Revelation 9–17.<\/p>\n<h6>P45 (Chester Beatty Papyrus I)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex has the four Gospels and Acts (Mt 20:24-32; 21:13-19; 25:41–26:39; Mk 4:36–9:31; 11:27–12:28; Lk 6:31–7:7; 9:26–14:33; Jn 4:51–5:2, 21-25; 10:7-25; 10:30–11:10, 18-36, 42-57; Acts 4:27–17:17). The order of books in the original intact manuscript was probably as follows: Matthew, John, Luke, Mark, Acts (the so-called Western order). This manuscript was dated by Kenyon to the early third century, a date that was confirmed by the papyrologists W. Schubart and H. I. Bell. This continues to be the date assigned to this manuscript in modern handbooks on textual criticism and critical editions of the Greek NT, but the consistent formation of certain letters suggests an earlier date—maybe sometime in the late second century.<\/p>\n<p>The scribe of P45 worked without any intention of exactly reproducing his source. He wrote with a great amount of freedom—harmonizing, smoothing out, substituting at will. In short, the scribe did not actually copy words. He saw through the language to its idea-content, and copied that in words of his own choosing, or in rearranged order. Thus, in the scribe of P45 we see an exegete and a paraphraser.<\/p>\n<h6>P46 (Chester Beatty Papyrus II)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex has most of Paul’s epistles (excluding the Pastorals) in this order: Romans 5:17–6:14; 8:15–15:9; 15:11–16:27; Hebrews 1:1–13:25; 1 Corinthians 1:1–16:22; 2 Corinthians 1:1–13:13; Ephesians 1:1–6:24; Galatians 1:1–6:18; Philippians 1:1–4:23; Colossians 1:1–4:18; 1 Thessalonians 1:1; 1:9–2:3; 5:5-9, 23-28 (with minor lacunae in each of the books).<\/p>\n<p>The manuscript was originally dated to the early third century. But others, since, have dated the manuscript earlier in the second century. The scribe who produced this manuscript used an early, excellent exemplar. He was a professional scribe because there are stichoi notations at the end of several books (see the conclusion of Romans, 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, Philippians). The stichoi were used by professionals to note how many lines had been copied for commensurate pay. Most likely, the ex officio of the scriptorium (perhaps connected with a church library) paginated the codex and indicated the stichoi. The scribe himself made a few corrections as he went, and then several other readers made corrections here and there.<\/p>\n<p>The text of P46 shows a strong affinity with B (especially in Ephesians, Colossians, and Hebrews) and next with א (Codex Sinaiticus). P46 agrees much less with the later representatives of the Alexandrian text. In short, P46 is proto-Alexandrian. In Hebrews, P46 and P13 display nearly the same text. Out of a total of 88 variation-units, there are 71 agreements and only 17 disagreements.<\/p>\n<h6>P47 (Chester Beatty Papyrus III)<\/h6>\n<p>This third-century codex contains Revelation 9:10–17:2. The text of P47 agrees more often with that of Codex Sinaiticus than with any other manuscript (including Codex Alexandrinus and Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus), though it often shows independence.<\/p>\n<h5>The Bodmer Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>These manuscripts were purchased by M. Martin Bodmer from a dealer in Egypt during the 1950s and 1960s. The three important papyri in this collection are P66 (c. 175, containing almost all of John), P72 (third century, having all of 1 and 2 Peter and Jude), and P75 (c. 200, containing large parts of Luke 3—John 15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h4\" id=\"P66\">P66 (Papyrus Bodmer II)<\/p>\n<p>This manuscript contains most of John’s Gospel (1:1–6:11; 6:35–14:26, 29-30; 15:2-26; 16:2-4, 6-7; 16:10–20:20, 22-23; 20:25–21:9). The manuscript does not include the pericope of the adulteress (7:53–8:11), making it the earliest witness to not include this spurious passage. The manuscript is usually dated as c. 200, but the renowned paleographer Herbert Hunger has argued that P66 should be dated to the first half, if not the first quarter, of the second century.<\/p>\n<p>According to recent studies, it seems evident that P66 has preserved the work of three individuals: the original scribe, a thoroughgoing corrector, and a minor corrector. With a practiced calligraphic hand, the original scribe of P66 wrote in larger print as he went along in order to fill out the codex. The large print throughout indicates that it was written to be read aloud to a Christian congregation. The text exhibits the scribe’s knowledge of other portions of Scripture (inasmuch as he harmonized John 6:69 to Matthew 16:16 and John 21:6 to Luke 5:5), his use of standard <em>nomina sacra<\/em> (a way of writing divine names), and his special use of <em>nomina sacra<\/em> for the words “cross” and “crucify.”<\/p>\n<p>The original scribe was quite free in his interaction with the text; he produced several singular readings that reveal his independent interpretation of the text. While the numerous scribal mistakes would seem to indicate that the scribe was inattentive, many of the singular readings—prior to correction—reveal that he was not detached from the narrative of the text. Rather, he became so absorbed in his reading that he often forgot the exact words he was copying. His task as a copyist was to duplicate the exemplar word for word, but this was frustrated by the fact that he was reading the text in logical semantic chunks and often became a coproducer of a new text. As a result, he continually had to stop his reading and make many in-process corrections. But he left several places uncorrected, which were later fixed by the <em>diorthotes<\/em> (official corrector). The finished product is quite good, presenting a text that is very close to the Alexandrian witnesses.<\/p>\n<h6>P72 (Papyrus Bodmer VII–VIII)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated late third century, has an interesting collection of writings in one codex: 1 Peter 1:1–5:14; 2 Peter 1:1–3:18; Jude 1:1-25; the Nativity of Mary, the apocryphal correspondence of Paul to the Corinthians, the eleventh ode of Solomon, Melito’s Homily on the Passover, a fragment of a hymn, the Apology of Phileas, and Psalms 33 and 34.<\/p>\n<p>Scholars think that four scribes took part in producing the entire manuscript. First Peter has clear Alexandrian affinities—especially with B. Second Peter and (especially) Jude display more of an uncontrolled type text (usually associated with the “Western” text), with several independent readings.<\/p>\n<h6>P75 (Papyrus Bodmer XIV–XV)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex contains most of Luke and John (Lk 3:18–4:2; 4:34–5:10; 5:37–18:18; 22:4–24:53; Jn 1:1–11:45, 48-57; 12:3–13:1, 8-9; 14:8-30; 15:7-8.) The manuscript does not include the pericope of the adulteress (7:53–8:11). The manuscript can be dated to the late second or early third century.<\/p>\n<p>The copyist of P75 was a literate scribe trained in making books. His craftsmanship shows through in his tight calligraphy and controlled copying. The handwriting displayed in this manuscript is typically called by paleographers the common angular type of the late second to early third century. The scribe’s Christianity shows in his abbreviations of the <em>nomina sacra<\/em><em>,<\/em> as well as in his abbreviation of the word “cross.” These are telltale signs of a scribe who belonged to the Christian community. Furthermore, the large typeface indicates that the manuscript was composed to be read aloud to a Christian congregation. The scribe even added a system of sectional divisions to aid any would-be lector. Thus, we have a manuscript written by a Christian for other Christians.<\/p>\n<p>There are several indications of the scribe’s Alexandrian orientation. First and foremost is his scriptoral acumen. He is the best of all the early Christian scribes, and his manuscript is an extremely accurate copy. P75 is the work of an extremely disciplined scribe who copied with the intention of being careful and accurate. Scholars generally agree that P75 displays the kind of text that was used in making Codex Vaticanus (there is 87 percent agreement between P75 and B). As such, textual scholars have a high regard for P75’s textual fidelity.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Other Papyrus Manuscripts<\/h5>\n<h6>P4 + P64 + P67<\/h6>\n<p>These three papyrus manuscripts are part of one codex dated <span>AD<\/span> 150–175. The manuscript was the work of a professional scribe, and the text is extremely accurate.<\/p>\n<h6>P32 (Rylands Papyrus 5)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, preserving Titus 1:11-15; 2:3-8, is dated c. 175, making it the earliest extant copy of any of the Pastoral Epistles. P32 shows agreement with א and with F and G. Since F and G (nearly identical manuscripts) go back to the same archetype, it is possible that P32 could be linked to the same source.<\/p>\n<h6>P52 (Rylands Papyrus 457)<\/h6>\n<p>This fragment, containing John 18:31-34, 37-38, is noteworthy because of its date: c. 110–125. Many scholars (F. Kenyon, H. I. Bell, A. Deissmann, and W. H. P. Hatch) have confirmed this dating. The manuscript came from the Fayum or Oxyrhynchus site. It was acquired in 1920 by Grenfell, but it remained unnoticed among hundreds of papyri until 1934, when C. H. Roberts recognized that this fragment preserves a few verses from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ImportantUncialManuscripts\">Important Uncial Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>The manuscripts typically classified as “uncial” are so designated to differentiate them from papyrus manuscripts. In a sense, this is a misnomer because the real difference has to do with the material they are written on—vellum (treated animal hide) as compared to papyrus—not the kind of letters used. Indeed, the papyri are also written in uncials (capital letters), but the term “uncial” typically describes the majuscule lettering that was prominent in fourth-century biblical texts, such as in א, A, B, C.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Sinaiticus (or א)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex contains the entire OT and the NT in this order: the four Gospels, the Pauline Epistles (including Hebrews), Acts, the General Epistles, Revelation. It also includes the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas. The codex cannot be earlier than 340 (the year Eusebius died) because the Eusebian sections of the text are indicated in the margins of the Gospels by a contemporary hand. Most scholars date it 350–375.<\/p>\n<p>This codex was discovered by Constantin von Tischendorf in St Catherine’s Monastery (situated at the foot of Mt Sinai). On a visit to the monastery in 1844 he noticed in a wastebasket some parchment leaves that were being used to light the lamps. He was allowed to take this waste paper, which proved to be 43 leaves from various parts of the Greek translation of the OT.<\/p>\n<p>In 1853 he made a second trip to the monastery and found nothing. In 1859, however, on his third trip, he found not only other parts of the OT but also the complete NT. He was finally able to persuade the monastery authorities to present the manuscript to the czar, the great patron of the Greek Catholic Church, who placed it in the Imperial Library in St Petersburg. The czar gave great honors to the monastery and its authorities, and everybody seemed well pleased. Later Tischendorf was charged with having stolen the manuscript from its lawful owners, but the better textual scholars do not accept that story.<\/p>\n\n<p>The manuscript remained in the Imperial Library until 1933, when it was purchased by the British Museum for the huge sum of £100,000 (about $500,000). Textual criticism made the headlines because one manuscript was bought for this much money, raised largely by public subscription during the Great Depression. The manuscript is now on display in the manuscript room of the museum, where it is considered one of its most prized possessions.<\/p>\n<p>The text of Sinaiticus is very closely related to that of Codex Vaticanus. They agree in presenting the purest type of text, usually called the Alexandrian text type. Tischendorf greatly used the textual evidence of Codex Sinaiticus in preparing his critical editions of the Greek NT. Tischendorf thought four scribes had originally produced the codex, whom he named scribes A, B, C, D. After reinvestigation, H. J. Milne and T. C. Skeat identified only three scribes: A (who wrote the historical and poetical books of the OT, as well as most of the NT), B (who wrote the Prophets and the Shepherd of Hermas), and D (who wrote some Psalms, Tobit, Judith, and 4 Maccabees, and redid small sections of the NT). Milne and Skeat demonstrated that scribe A of Codex Vaticanus was likely the same scribe as scribe D of Codex Sinaiticus. If this true, then א is contemporary with B—perhaps produced in the same scriptorium in Alexandria. Codex Sinaiticus provides a fairly reliable witness to the NT; however, the scribe was not as careful as the scribe of B.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Alexandrinus (A)<\/h5>\n<p>This is one of the three most important codices containing early copies of the whole Bible in Greek (the other two being the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus codexes). The name Alexandrinus comes from ancient records suggesting that it was copied in Egypt during the early part of the fifth century <span>AD<\/span>. The early history of this manuscript and its Egyptian provenance is partially revealed by its flyleaves. A note by Cyril of Lucar (patriarch of Alexandria and then of Constantinople in the 1620s) states that, according to tradition, it was written by Thecla, a noble lady of Egypt shortly after the Council of Nicaea (325) and that her name was originally inscribed at the end of the volume but the last page was lost due to mutilation. An Arabic note of the 13th or 14th century also says that the manuscript was written by “Thecla the martyr.” Another Arabic note says that is was presented to the patriarchal cell of Alexandria (c. 1098). Cyril of Lucar took the manuscript from Alexandria to Constantinople in 1621 and then gave it to Charles I of England in 1627, where it became part of the Royal Library, then later the British Museum.<\/p>\n<p>Only 773 of the original 820 or so pages still exist. The rest were lost as the book was passed down through the centuries. The surviving parts of Alexandrinus contain a Greek translation of the whole OT, the Apocrypha (including four books of Maccabees and Psalm 151), most of the NT, and some early Christian writings (of which the First and Second Epistles of Clement to the Corinthians are the most important).<\/p>\n<p>Frederick Kenyon thought the codex was the work of five scribes, to each of whom he designated a Roman numeral. According to Kenyon, scribes I and II copied the OT; scribe III did Matthew, Mark, 1 Corinthians 10:8—Philemon 1:25; scribe IV did Luke—Acts, General Epistles, Romans 1:1—1 Corinthians 10:8; and scribe V did Revelation. Milne and Skeat, however, argued that the whole codex was the work of two copyists (I and II). W. H. P. Hatch noted that many corrections have been made in the manuscript, most of them at an early date. Some of these corrections were introduced by the scribe himself, and others came from later hands.<\/p>\n<p>Evidently, the scribes of this codex used exemplars of varying quality for various sections of the NT. The exemplar used for the Gospels was of poor quality, reflecting a Byzantine text type. Its testimony in the Epistles is much better, and in Revelation it provides the best witness to the original text.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Codex Vaticanus (B)<\/h5>\n<p>Codex Vaticanus is the Vatican Manuscript, so named because it is the most famous manuscript in the Vatican Library in Rome. This manuscript has been in the Vatican’s library since at least 1475, but it was not made available to scholars, such as Constantin von Tischendorf and Samuel Tregelles, until the middle of the 19th century.<\/p>\n<p>At one time, the codex contained the whole Greek Bible, including most of the books of the Apocrypha, but it has lost many of its leaves. Originally it must have had about 820 leaves (1,640 pp), but now it has 759—617 in the OT and 142 in the NT. The major gaps of the manuscript are Genesis 1:1–46:28; 2 Samuel 2:5-7, 10-13; Psalms 106:27–138:6; Hebrews 9:14–13:25; the Pastoral Epistles; and Revelation. Each leaf measures ten and a half by ten inches (26.7 by 25.4 centimeters). Each page has three columns (two for the poetical books) with 40 to 44 lines to the column. The manuscript was written by two different scribes. It is dated in the early to middle part of the fourth century. It is not known where the manuscript originated, but it has been in the Vatican Library from the time of its earliest catalog in 1475.<\/p>\n\n<p>When Napoleon conquered Rome, he brought its treasures to Paris, including this manuscript. The scholar Hug identified it and called the attention of other scholars to it. After the downfall of Napoleon, the manuscript was returned to the Vatican Library. Competent textual scholars were not allowed to do careful work on it until a photographic edition was published in 1890. It is now on exhibit in the Vatican Library.<\/p>\n<p>The text of the Vatican Manuscript is much like that of Codex Sinaiticus. These are generally recognized as the two finest examples of the Alexandrian type of Greek text of the NT. The Greek text of the OT is very fine too, but it is not quite so important, as the original language of the OT was Hebrew. Virtually all the textual scholars since the days of Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort (who brought out their Greek Testament, including their theory of textual criticism, in 1881), recognize this neutral type of text as a very early text and a very pure text, an extremely accurate reproduction of what the original text must have been. Westcott and Hort called it a second-century text accurate in 999 out of 1,000 words so far as any matter of translatable difference was concerned. א and B are the finest examples of this type of text, but it is also found in a few other Greek uncial manuscripts, a few of the early translations, and in the writings of a few of the early church fathers. Since the days of Westcott and Hort, their theory has been confirmed by the discovery of some papyrus manuscripts, notably the Bodmer Papyri, discovered in the 1950s.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus (C)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex is a palimpsest (the original writing was erased and different words written on the same material). It originally contained the entire Bible but now has only parts of six OT books and portions of all NT books except 2 Thessalonians and 2 John. The single-column Bible text, written in the 5th century <span>AD<\/span>, was erased in the 12th century and replaced by a two-column text of a Greek translation of sermons or treatises by a certain Ephraem, a 4th-century Syrian church leader. Such a practice was common in periods of economic depression or when parchment was scarce. The original writing was scraped from the writing surface and the surface smoothed. Then new compositions could be written on the prepared surface. Using chemicals Tischendorf was able to read much of the erased document.<\/p>\n<p>The manuscript may have been brought from the east to Florence by a learned Greek named Andrew John Lascar in the time of Lorenzo de’Medici. Since Lascar was known as Rhyndacenus (from the river Rhyndacus), he probably came from the region of Phrygia (site of ancient Laodicea). Where the manuscript was prior to this is not known. The Ephraemi manuscript was brought to Italy in the early sixth century, where it became the property of the Medici family. Catherine de’Medici took it to France, where it remains today.<\/p>\n<p>The text of this manuscript is mixed—it is compounded from all the major text types, agreeing frequently with the later koine of Byzantine type, which most scholars regard as the least valuable type of NT text.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Bezae (D)<\/h5>\n<p>This is a Greek-Latin diglot containing Matthew—Acts, 3 John, with lacunae. Most scholars date it late fourth or early fifth century (c. 400). Some scholars think the codex was produced in either Egypt or North Africa by a scribe whose mother tongue was Latin. Another scholar (D. C. Parker) has argued that it was copied in Beirut, a center of Latin legal studies during the fifth century, where both Latin and Greek were used. Evidently, it was produced by a scribe who knew Latin better than Greek, and then was corrected by several scribes. In any event, the codex somehow came into the hands of Theodore Beza, French scholar and successor to Calvin. Beza gave it to the Cambridge University Library in 1581.<\/p>\n<p>This codex is probably the most controversial of the NT uncials because of its marked independence. Its many additions, omissions, and alterations (especially in Luke and Acts) are the work of a significant theologian. A few earlier manuscripts (P29, P38, P48, and 0171) appear to be precursors to the type of text found in D, which is considered the principal witness of the Western text-type. Thus, Codex Bezae could be a copy of an earlier revised edition. This reviser must have been a scholar who had a propensity for adding historical, biographical, and geographical details. More than anything, he was intent on filling in gaps in the narrative by adding circumstantial details.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Washingtonianus, or The Freer Gospels (W)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex, dated around 400, has the four Gospels and Acts. It is often referred to as the Freer Gospels—named after its owner, Charles Freer. The codex likely came from the ruins of a monastery near Giza. The handwriting is quite similar to that found in a fifth-century fragment of the book of Enoch found at Akhmim in 1886.<\/p>\n<p>Codex W was copied from a parent manuscript (exemplar) that had been pieced together from several different manuscripts. This is obvious because the textual presentation of W is noticeably variegated and even the stratification of the text is matched by similar variations in paragraphing. The scribe who collated the parent manuscript drew upon various sources to put together his Gospel codex. It is likely that the scribe of the parent manuscript used a text that came from North Africa (the “Western” text) for the first part of Mark, and the scribe of W used manuscripts from Antioch for Matthew and the second part of Luke to fill the gaps in the more ancient manuscript he was copying. Detailed textual analysis reveals the variegated textual stratifications of W, as follows: in Matthew the text is Byzantine; in Mark the text is first Western (1:1–5:30), then Caesarean in Mark 5:31–16:20 (akin to P45); in Luke the text is first Alexandrian (1:1–8:12), then Byzantine. John is more complicated because the first part of John (1:1–5:11), which fills a quire, was the work of a seventh-century scribe who must have replaced a damaged quire. (W<span>s<\/span> designates the work of this scribe.) This first section has a mixture of Alexandrian and Western readings, as does the rest of John.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex 1739<\/h5>\n<p>This tenth-century codex has Acts and the Epistles. The manuscript was discovered at Mt Athos in 1879 by E. von der Goltz. The manuscript has strong textual affinities with P46, B, 1739, Coptic Sahidic, Coptic Boharic, Clement, and Origen. The relationship between P46, B, and 1739 is remarkable because 1739 is a tenth-century manuscript that was copied from a fourth-century manuscript of excellent quality. According to a colophon, the scribe of 1739 for the Pauline Epistles followed a manuscript that came from Caesarea in the library of Pamphilus and that contained an Origenian text. The three manuscripts, P46, B, and 1739, form a clear textual line: from P46 (early second century) to B (early fourth century) to 1739 (tenth century based on fourth century).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTextoftheNewTestament\">The Text of the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The original text of the NT is the “published” text—that is, the text as it was in its final edited form and released for circulation in the Christian community. For some books of the NT, there is little difference between the original composition and the published text. After the author wrote or dictated his work, he (or an associate) made the final editorial corrections and then released it for distribution. As is the case for books published in modern times, so in ancient times, the original writing of the author is not always the same as what is published—due to the editorial process. Nonetheless, the author is credited with the final edited text, and the published book is attributed to the author and considered the autograph. This autograph is the original published text. Of course, in this case the autographs do not exist, so scholars have to rely on copies to recover or reconstruct the original wording.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars think it is impossible to recover the original text of the Greek NT because they have not been able to reconstruct the early history of textual transmission. Other modern scholars are less pessimistic but still quite guarded in affirming the possiblity. And yet others are optimistic because we possess many early manuscripts of excellent quality and because our view of the early period of textual transmission has been getting clearer and clearer.<\/p>\n<p>When we speak of recovering the text of the NT, we are referring to individual books of the NT, not to the entire volume per se, because each book (or group of books—such as the Pauline Epistles) had its own unique history of textual transmission. The earliest extant copy of an entire NT text is the one preserved in Codex Sinaiticus (written about <span>AD<\/span> 375). (Codex Vaticanus lacks the Pastoral Epistles and Revelation.) Prior to the fourth century, the NT was circulated in its various parts: as a single book or a group of books (such as the four Gospels or the Pauline Epistles). Manuscripts from the late first century to the third century have been found with individual books such as Matthew (P1, P77), Mark (P88), Luke (P69), John (P5, 22, 52, 66), Acts (P91), Revelation (P18, 47), or containing groups of books, such as the four Gospels with Acts (P45), the Pauline Epistles (P30, P46, P92), the Petrine Epistles and Jude (P72). Each of the books of the NT has had its own textual history and has been preserved with varying degrees of accuracy. Nonetheless, all of the books were altered from the original state due to the process of manual copying decade after decade and century after century. And the text of each of the books needs to be recovered.<\/p>\n<p>The NT text was affected with many variations in its early history. In the late first and early second century, the oral traditions and the written word existed side by side with equal status—especially with respect to the material of the Gospels. Often, the text was changed by scribes attempting to conform the written message to the oral tradition or attempting to conform one Gospel account to another. By the end of the second century and into the third century, many of the significant variant readings entered into the textual stream.<\/p>\n<p>The early period of textual transmission, however, was not completely marred by textual infidelity and scribal liberty. There were those scribes who copied the text faithfully and reverently—that is, they recognized that they were copying a sacred text written by an apostle. The formalization of canonization did not ascribe this sacredness to the text. Canonization came about as the result of common, historical recognition of the sacredness of various NT books. Certain NT books, such as the four Gospels, Acts, and Paul’s epistles were considered inspired literature from the onset. As such, certain scribes copied them with reverential fidelity.<\/p>\n<p>Other scribes, however, felt free to make “improvements” in the text—either in the interest of doctrine and harmonization or due to the influence of a competitive oral tradition. The manuscripts produced in such a manner created a kind of “popular text”—i.e., an uncontrolled text. (This text type used to be called the “Western text,” but scholars now recognize this as a misnomer.)<\/p>\n<p>During the second century, there were a few men who produced recensions of the NT text. According to Eusebius, Theodotus (and his followers) altered the text for their own purposes. In the middle of the second century, Marcion expunged his copies of the Gospel according to Luke of all references to the Jewish background of Jesus, and Tatian’s harmony of the Gospels contains several textual alterations that gave support to ascetic views. And yet another recendor created the D-type text for the Gospels and Acts. This theologically minded redactor, living in the late second or third century, created a text that had short-lived popularity. Three third-century papyri, P29, P38, P48, each containing a portion from the book of Acts, may be precursors to the D-type text in Acts. But there are other papyri containing portions of Acts that provide even earlier testimony to a purer form of Acts—namely, P45 (c. 150) and P91 (c. 200), thereby showing that the D-type text of Acts did not necessarily antedate the purer form.<\/p>\n<p>Besides these endeavors—which are all noted for creating textual impurities—there was no recension of the NT text in the second century. Rather, it was a period in which there were scribes who exercised freedom in copying and those who demonstrated acumen. The manuscripts produced by the latter are those that come closest to preserving the original text. A prime example of an accurate late-second-century manuscript is P75.<\/p>\n<p>It is a well-known fact that the text produced by the scribe of P75 is a very accurate manuscript. It is also well-known that P75 was the kind of manuscript used in formulating Codex Vaticanus—the readings of P75 and B are remarkably similar. Prior to the discovery of P75, certain scholars thought Codex Vaticanus was the work of a fourth-century recension; others (chiefly Hort) thought it must trace back to a very early and accurate copy. Hort said that Codex Vaticanus preserves “not only a very ancient text, but a very pure line of a very ancient text” (Westcott and Hort, <em>The<\/em> <em>Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> pp 250–51). P75 appears to have shown that Hort was right.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the discovery of P75, many textual scholars were convinced that the second- and third-century papyri displayed a text in flux, a text characterized only by individual independence. The Chester Beatty Papyrus, P45, and the Bodmer Papyri, P66 and P72 (in 2 Peter and Jude), show this kind of independence. Scholars thought that scribes at Alexandria must have used several such texts to produce a good recension—as is exhibited in Codex Vaticanus. But we now know that Codex Vaticanus was not the result of a scholarly recension, resulting from editorial selection across the various textual histories. Rather, it is now quite clear that Codex Vaticanus was simply a copy (with some modifications) of a manuscript much like P75, not a fourth-century recension.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars may point out that this does not automatically mean that P75 and B represent the original text. What it does mean, they say, is that we have a second-century manuscript showing great affinity with a fourth-century manuscript whose quality has been highly esteemed. But various scholars have demonstrated that there was no Alexandrian recension before the time of P75 (late second century) and B (early fourth) and that both these manuscripts represent a relatively pure form of preservation of a relatively pure line of descent from the original text.<\/p>\n<p>The current view about the early text is that certain scribes in Alexandria and\/or scribes familiar with Alexandrian scriptoral practices (perhaps those in Oxyrhynchus) were probably responsible for maintaining a relatively pure text throughout the second, third, and fourth centuries. The Alexandrian scribes, associated with or actually employed by the scriptorium of the great Alexandrian library and\/or members of the scriptorium associated with the catechetical school at Alexandria (called the <em>Didaskelion<\/em>), were trained philologists, grammarians, and textual critics. Their work on the NT was not recensional—that is, it was not an organized emendation of the text. Rather, the work of purification and preservation was probably done here and there by various individuals trained in text criticism. This is apparent in the production of P66, which contains the Gospel of John. This manuscript was probably produced in an Egyptian scriptorium by a novice scribe who made many blunders, which were subsequently corrected by another scribe working in the same scriptorium. The first text produced by the novice could be classified as being very “free,” but the corrected text is far more accurate. (See the discussion on this manuscript above.)<\/p>\n<p>What appears to have happened with the copying of the NT text in the early period in Egypt has been poignantly characterized by Zuntz. He said that when a book was immensely popular (such as Homer’s <em>Iliad<\/em> and <em>Odyssey,<\/em> or Plato’s writings), it was copied with wild enthusiasm by novice and scholar alike. But when grammarians and scribes got ahold of it, they tried to rid it of textual corruption. In the process, however, they may have obliterated some authentic readings, but not many. Thus, the popular text (also known as the “Western text”) could have preserved the original wording in some cases. The popular or free kind of text is displayed in several third-century manuscripts: P9, P37, P40, P45, P72, and P78.<\/p>\n<p>In brief, this popular text is usually displayed in any kind of manuscript that was not produced by Alexandrian influences. This text, given to independence, is not as trustworthy as the Alexandrian text type. But because the Alexandrian text is known as a polished text, the popular text sometimes preserved the original wording. When a variant reading has the support of “Western” and Alexandrian texts, it is very likely original; but when the two are divided, the Alexandrian witnesses more often preserve the original wording.<\/p>\n<p>One dilemma still remains for some textual critics. They cannot explain how a P75\/B-type text coexisted with a Western-type text in the second century. All that can be said is that the Western text generally appears to be inferior to the P75\/B-type text. Of course, this kind of judgment troubles certain scholars, who point out that the esteem given to B and P75 is based on a subjective appreciation of the kind of text they contain (as over against the Western text) rather than on any kind of theoretical reconstruction of the early transmission of the text. This same subjective estimation was at work when Westcott and Hort decided that B was intrinsically superior to D (see their <em>Introduction,<\/em> pp 32–42). Yet the praxis of textual criticism time and again demonstrates that the P75\/B-type text is intrinsically superior to the Western text.<\/p>\n<p>In the final analysis, the manuscripts that represent a pure preservation of the original text are usually those called “Alexandrian.” Some scholars, such as Bruce Metzger, have called the earlier manuscripts “protoAlexandrian,” for they (or manuscripts like them) are thought of as being used to compose an Alexandrian-type text. However, this is looking at things from the perspective of the fourth century. We should look at things from the second century onward and then compare fourth-century manuscripts to those of the second. The second-century manuscripts could still be called “Alexandrian” in the sense that they were produced under Alexandrian influences. Perhaps a distinguishing terminology could be “early Alexandrian” (pre-Constantine) and “later Alexandrian” (post-Constantine). Manuscripts designated as “early Alexandrian” would generally be purer, less editorialized. Manuscripts designated “later Alexandrian” would display editorialization, as well as the influence of other textual traditions.<\/p>\n<p>The “early Alexandrian” text is reflected in many second- and third-century manuscripts. On the top of the list is P75 (c. 175), the work of a competent and careful scribe. Not far behind in quality is P4+P64+P67 (c. 150), the work of an excellent copyist. Other extremely good copies are P1 (c. 200), P20 (early third century), P23 (c. 200), P27 (third century), P28 (third century), P32 (c. 150), P39 (third century), P46 (c. 125), P65 (third century), P66 (in its corrected form—P66<span>c<\/span>; c. 150), P70 (third century), P77 (c. 150), P87 (c. 125), P90 (c. 175), and P91 (c. 200). Several of these manuscripts have been placed in the “strict” category by textual critics Kurt and Barbara Aland—that is, they exhibit “strict” scribal control and therefore are accurate copies of an exemplar, if not the original. These manuscripts are P1, P23, P35, P37, P39, P64\/67, P65, P70, and P75.<\/p>\n<p>The “later Alexandrian” text, which displays editorial polishing, is exhibited in a few manuscripts, such as א (fourth century), T (fifth century), ע (seventh century), L (eighth century), 33 (ninth century), 1739 (a tenth-century manuscript copied from a fourth-century Alexandrian manuscript much like P46), and 579 (13th century). Beginning in the fifth century, Byzantine-type manuscripts began to make their influence in Egypt. Some manuscripts dated around 400 that came from Egypt clearly reflect this influence; Codex Alexandrinus (A) is probably the best example. Other Egyptian manuscripts of this era, such as Codex Sinaiticus (א) and Codex Washingtonianus (W) display large-scale harmonization, which cannot be directly linked to any kind of recension.<\/p>\n<p>At the end of the third century, another kind of Greek text came into being and then grew in popularity until it became the dominant text-type throughout Christendom. This is the text-type first instigated by Lucian of Antioch, according to Jerome (in his introduction to his Latin translation of the Gospels). Lucian’s text was a definite recension (i.e., a purposely created edition)—as opposed to the Alexandrian text-type that came about as the result of a process wherein the Alexandrian scribes, upon comparing many manuscripts, attempted to preserve the best text—thereby serving more as textual critics than editors. Of course, the Alexandrians did do some editing—such as we would call copy-editing. The Lucianic text is the outgrowth and culmination of the popular text; it is characterized by smoothness of language, which is achieved by the removal of obscurities and awkward grammatical constructions and by the conflation of variant readings. Lucian (and\/or his associates) must have used many different kinds of manuscripts of varying qualities to produce a harmonized, edited NT text. The kind of editorial work that went into the Lucianic text is what we would call substantive editing.<\/p>\n<p>Lucian’s text was produced prior to the Diocletian persecution (c. 303), during which time many copies of the NT were confiscated and destroyed. Not long after this period of devastation, Constantine came to power and then recognized Christianity as the state religion. There was, of course, a great need for copies of the NT to be made and distributed to churches throughout the Mediterranean world. It was at this time that Lucian’s text began to be propagated by bishops going out from the Antiochan school to churches throughout the East, taking the text with them. Lucian’s text soon became the standard text of the Eastern church and formed the basis for the Byzantine text—and is thus the ultimate authority for the Textus Receptus.<\/p>\n<p>While Lucian was forming his recension of the NT text, the Alexandrian text was taking on its final shape. As was mentioned earlier, the formation of the Alexandrian text-type was the result of a process (as opposed to a single editorial recension). The formation of the Alexandrian text involved minor textual criticism (i.e., selecting variant readings among various manuscripts) and copyediting (i.e., producing a readable text). There was far less tampering with the text in the Alexandrian text-type than in the Lucian, and the underlying manuscripts for the Alexandrian text-type were superior to those used by Lucian. Perhaps Hesychius was responsible for giving the Alexandrian text its final shape, and Athanasius of Alexandria may have been the one who made this text the archetypal text for Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>As the years went by, there were fewer and fewer Alexandrian manuscripts produced, and more and more Byzantine manuscripts manufactured. Very few Egyptians continued to read Greek (with the exception of those in St Catherine’s Monastery, the site of the discovery of Codex Sinaiticus), and the rest of the Mediterranean world turned to Latin. It was only those in the Greek-speaking churches in Greece and Byzantium that continued to make copies of the Greek text. For century after century—from the 6th to the 14th—the great majority of NT manuscripts were produced in Byzantium, all bearing the same kind of text. When the first Greek NT was printed (c. 1525), it was based on a Greek text that Erasmus had compiled, using a few late Byzantine manuscripts. This printed text, with minor revisions, became the Textus Receptus.<\/p>\n<p>Beginning in the 17th century, earlier manuscripts began to be discovered—manuscripts with a text that differed from that found in the Textus Receptus. Around 1630, Codex Alexandrinus was brought to England. An early fifth-century manuscript, containing the entire NT, it provided a good, early witness to the NT text (it is an especially good witness to the original text of Revelation). Two hundred years later, a German scholar named Constantin von Tischendorf discovered Codex Sinaiticus in St Catherine’s Monastery (located near Mt Sinai). The manuscript, dated around <span>AD<\/span> 360, is one of the two oldest vellum (treated animal hide) manuscripts of the Greek NT. The earliest vellum manuscript, Codex Vaticanus, had been in the Vatican’s library since at least 1481, but it had not been made available to scholars until the middle of the 19th century. This manuscript, dated slightly earlier (<span>AD<\/span> 350) than Codex Sinaiticus, had both the OT and NT in Greek, excluding the last part of the NT (Hebrews 9:15 to Revelation 22:21 and the Pastoral Epistles). A hundred years of textual criticism has determined that this manuscript is one of the most accurate and reliable witnesses to the original text.<\/p>\n<p>Other early and important manuscripts were discovered in the 19th century. Through the tireless labors of men like Constantin von Tischendorf, Samuel Tregelles, and F. H. A. Scrivener, manuscripts such as Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, Codex Zacynthius, and Codex Augiensis were deciphered, collated, and published.<\/p>\n<p>As the various manuscripts were discovered and made public, certain scholars labored to compile a Greek text that would more closely represent the original text than did the Textus Receptus. Around 1700 John Mill produced an improved Textus Receptus, and in the 1730s Johannes Albert Bengel (known as the father of modern textual and philological studies in the NT) published a text that deviated from the Textus Receptus according to the evidence of earlier manuscripts.<\/p>\n<p>In the 1800s certain scholars began to abandon the Textus Receptus. Karl Lachman, a classical philologist, produced a fresh text (in 1831) that represented the fourth-century manuscripts. Samuel Tregelles (self-taught in Latin, Hebrew, and Greek), laboring throughout his entire lifetime, concentrated all of his efforts in publishing one Greek text (which came out in six parts, from 1857 to 1872). As is stated in the introduction to this work, Tregelles’s goal was “to exhibit the text of the NT in the very words in which it has been transmitted on the evidence of ancient authority.” Henry Alford also compiled a Greek text based upon the best and earliest manuscripts. In his preface to <em>The Greek New Testament<\/em> (a multivolume commentary on the Greek NT, published in 1849), Alford said he labored for the “demolition of the unworthy and pedantic reverence for the received text, which stood in the way of all chance of discovering the genuine word of God.”<\/p>\n<p>During this same era, Tischendorf was devoting a lifetime of labor to discovering manuscripts and producing accurate editions of the Greek NT. In a letter to his fiancé he wrote, “I am confronted with a sacred task, the struggle to regain the original form of the NT.” In fulfillment of his desire, he discovered Codex Sinaiticus, deciphered the palimpsest Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, collated countless manuscripts, and produced several editions of the Greek NT (the eighth edition is considered the best).<\/p>\n<p>Aided by the work of the previous scholars, two British men, Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort, worked together for 28 years to produce a volume entitled <em>The New Testament in the Original Greek<\/em> (1881). Along with this publication, they made known their theory (which was chiefly Hort’s) that Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus (along with a few other early manuscripts) represented a text that most closely replicated the original writing. They called this text the Neutral Text. (According to their studies, the Neutral Text described certain manuscripts that had the least amount of textual corruption.) This is the text that Westcott and Hort relied upon for compiling their volume.<\/p>\n<p>The 19th century was a fruitful era for the recovery of the Greek NT; the 20th century, no less so. Those living in the 20th century have witnessed the discovery of the Oxyrhynchus Papyri, the Chester Beatty Papyri, and the Bodmer Papyri. To date, there are nearly 100 papyri containing portions of the NT—several of which date from the late first century to the early fourth century. These significant discoveries, providing scholars with many ancient manuscripts, have greatly enhanced the effort to recover the original wording of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>At the beginning of the 20th century, Eberhard Nestle used the best editions of the Greek NT produced in the 19th century to compile a text that represented the majority consensus. The work of making new editions was carried on by his son for several years, and then came under the care of Kurt Aland. The latest edition (the 27th) of Nestle-Aland’s <em>Novum Testamentum Graece<\/em> appeared in 1993. The same Greek text appears in another popular volume published by the United Bible Societies, called the <em>Greek New Testament<\/em> (fourth edition). Aland has argued that the Nestle-Aland text, 27th edition (NA<span>27<\/span>), comes closer to the original text of the NT than did Tischendorf or Westcott and Hort. And in several writings he intimates that NA<span>27<\/span> may very well be the original text. Though few, if any, scholars would agree with this, the 27th edition of the Nestle-Aland text is regarded by many as representing the latest and best in textual scholarship.<\/p>\n<h5>New Testament Textual Criticism<\/h5>\n<p>Textual critics working with ancient literature universally acknowledge the supremacy of earlier manuscripts over later ones. Textual critics not working with the NT would love to have the same kind of early witnesses that biblical scholars possess. In fact, many of them work with manuscripts written 1,000 years after the autographs were composed! We all marvel that the Dead Sea Scrolls have provided a text that is nearly 800 years closer to the originals than the Masoretic manuscripts, and yet many of the Dead Sea manuscripts are still over 600 to 800 years removed from the time of original composition. NT textual critics have a great advantage!<\/p>\n<p>The 19th-century NT textual scholars—such as Lachmann, Tregelles, Tischendorf, Westcott and Hort—worked on the basis that the earliest witnesses are the best witnesses. Some textual scholars have continued this line of recovery using the testimony of the earlier witnesses. But many textual scholars since the time of Westcott and Hort have been less inclined to produce editions based on the theory that the earliest reading is the best. Most present-day textual critics are more inclined to endorse the maxim: the reading that is most likely original is the one that best explains the variants.<\/p>\n<p>This maxim (or “canon” as it is sometimes called), as good as it is, produces conflicting results. For example, two scholars, using this same principle to examine the same variant unit, will not agree. One will argue that one variant was produced by a copyist attempting to emulate the author’s style; the other will claim the same variant has to be original because it accords with the author’s style. One will argue that one variant was produced by an orthodox scribe attempting to rid the text of a reading that could be used to promote heterodoxy or heresy; another will claim that the same variant has to be original because it is orthodox and accords with Christian doctrine (thus a heterodox or heretical scribe must have changed it). Furthermore, this principle allows for the possibility that the reading selected for the text can be taken from any manuscript of any date. This can lead to subjective eclecticism.<\/p>\n<p>Modern textual scholars have attempted to temper the subjectivism by employing a method called “reasoned eclecticism.” This kind of eclecticism applies a combination of internal and external considerations, whereby the character of the variants is evaluated in light of the manuscripts’ evidence and vice versa. This is supposed to produce a balanced view and serve as a check against purely subjective tendencies.<\/p>\n<p>The Alands favor the same kind of approach, calling it the local-genealogical method, which is defined as follows:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>It is impossible to proceed from the assumption of a manuscript stemma, and on the basis of a full review and analysis of the relationships obtaining among the variety of interrelated branches in the manuscript tradition, to undertake a recension of the data as one would do with other Greek texts. Decisions must be made one by one, instance by instance. This method has been characterized as eclecticism, but wrongly so. After carefully establishing the variety of readings offered in a passage and the possibilities of their interpretation, it must always then be determined afresh on the basis of external and internal criteria which of these readings (and frequently they are quite numerous) is the original, from which the others may be regarded as derivative. From the perspective of our present knowledge, this “local-genealogical” method (if it must be given a name) is the only one which meets the requirements of the NT textual tradition. (Introduction to <em>Novum Testamentum Graece,<\/em> 26th edition)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>The “local-genealogical” method assumes that for any given variation unit any manuscript (or manuscripts) may have preserved the original text. Applying this method produces an extremely uneven documentary presentation of the text. Anyone studying the critical apparatus of NA<span>27<\/span> will detect that there is not an even documentary presentation. The eclecticism is dispersed throughout the text.<\/p>\n<p>“Reasoned eclecticism” and\/or the “local-genealogical” method tend to give priority to internal evidence over external evidence. But it has to be the other way around if we are going to recover the original text. This was Westcott and Hort’s opinion. With respect to their compilation of <em>The New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> Hort wrote, “Documentary evidence has been in most cases allowed to confer the place of honour against internal evidence” (<em>The Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> p 17).<\/p>\n<p>In this respect, Westcott and Hort need to be revived. Earnest Colwell was of the same mind when he wrote “Hort Redivivus: A Plea and a Program.” Colwell decried the growing tendency to rely entirely on the internal evidence of readings, without serious consideration of documentary evidence. He called upon scholars to make an attempt to reconstruct a history of the manuscript tradition. The abundance of manuscripts—several of which are very early—will aid scholars in this ongoing task.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BIBLE*, M<span>anuscripts and Text of the (New Testament)<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Copies of the NT books produced by scribes and editions made from these copies. In the centuries prior to the simultaneous-multiple production of copies via dictation (wherein many scribes in a scriptorium transcribed a text dictated to them by one reader), all manuscript copies were made singly—each scribe producing a copy from an exemplar.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the 15th century, when Johannes Gutenberg invented movable type for the printing press, all copies of any work of literature were made by hand (hence, the name “manuscript”). According to a current tabulation, there are 99 papyrus manuscripts, 257 uncial manuscripts, and 2,795 minuscule manuscripts. We can add 2,209 Greek lectionaries to this list. Therefore, we have over 5,350 manuscript copies of the Greek NT or portions thereof. No other work of Greek literature can boast of such numbers.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Important Papyrus Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>• Important Uncial Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>• The Text of the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ImportantPapyrusManuscripts\">Important Papyrus Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>Papyrus is a tall, aquatic reed, the pith of which is cut into strips, laid in a crosswork pattern and glued together to make a page for writing. The papyrus rolls of Egypt have been used as a writing surface since the early third millennium <span>BC<\/span>. The Greeks adopted papyrus around 900 <span>BC<\/span>, and later the Romans adopted its use. However, the oldest extant Greek rolls of papyrus date from the fourth century <span>BC<\/span>. Unfortunately, papyrus is perishable, requiring a dry climate for its preservation. That is why so many papyri have been discovered in the desert sands of Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>The NT papyrus manuscripts (abbreviated as “P”) are generally the earliest manuscripts of the NT. Broadly speaking, the most important ones can be categorized in three groups: the Oxyrhynchus Papyri (from Oxyrhynchus, Egypt), (2) the Beatty Papyri (named after the owner); and (3) the Bodmer Papyri (named after the owner).<\/p>\n<h5>The Oxyrhynchus Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>Beginning in 1898 B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt discovered thousands of papyrus fragments in the ancient rubbish heaps of Oxyrhynchus, Egypt. This site yielded volumes of papyrus fragments containing all sorts of written material (literature, business and legal contracts, letters, etc.) as well as over 40 manuscripts containing portions of the NT. Some of the more noteworthy papyrus manuscripts from Oxyrhynchus are as follows:<\/p>\n<h6>P1 (P. Oxy. 2)<\/h6>\n<p>This late second-century manuscript contains Matthew 1:1-9, 12, 14-20. Grenfell and Hunt in the winter of 1896–97 went to Oxyrhynchus (now called El Bahnasa) in search of ancient Christian documents. P1 was discovered on the second day of the dig. At the time of this discovery, this was the earliest extant copy of any NT portion—at least 100 years earlier than Codex Vaticanus. The copyist of P1 seems to have faithfully followed a very reliable exemplar. Where there are major variants, P1 agrees with the best Alexandrian witnesses, especially B (Codex Vaticanus), from which it rarely varies.<\/p>\n<h6>P5 (P. Oxy. 208 and 1781)<\/h6>\n<p>Two separate portions of this third-century manuscript were unearthed from Oxyrhynchus by Grenfell and Hunt, both from the same papyrus manuscript. The first portion contains John 1:23-31, 33-40 on one fragment and John 20:11-17 on another—probably on the first and last quires of a manuscript containing only the Gospel of John. This portion was published in volume II of <em>Oxyrhynchus Papyri<\/em> in 1899; the second portion—containing John 16:14-30—was not published until 1922 in volume XV of <em>Oxyrhynchus Papyri.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>After examining the first portion, Grenfell and Hunt said, “The text is a good one, and appears to have affinities with that of Codex Sinaiticus, with which the papyrus agrees in several readings not found elsewhere.” The papyrus, written in a documentary hand, is marked for its brevity.<\/p>\n<h6>P13 (P. Oxy. 657 and PSI 1292)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated between 175 and 225, contains 12 columns from a roll preserving the text of Hebrews 2:14–5:5; 10:8-22; 10:29–11:13; 11:28–12:7. The text of Hebrews was written in a reformed documentary hand on the back of the papyrus containing the new epitome of Livy. For this reason, some scholars think the manuscript was possibly brought to Egpyt by a Roman official and left behind when he left his post. P13 very often agrees with B, and it supplements B where it is lacking—namely, from Hebrews 9:14 to the end of Hebrews. P13 and P46 display nearly the same text. Out of a total of 88 variation-units, there are 71 agreements and only 17 disagreements.<\/p>\n<h6>P77 (P. Oxy. 2683 + 4405)<\/h6>\n<p>Dated c. 150–75, this is the earliest manuscript of Matthew (23:30-39). The manuscript is clearly a literary production. It was written in an elegant hand and has what was or became a standard system of chapter division, as well as punctuation and breathing marks. P77 has close textual affinities with Codex Sinaiticus.<\/p>\n<h6>P90 (P. Oxy. 3523)<\/h6>\n<p>This second-century manuscript (c. 150–75) contains John 18:36–19:7. The handwriting (an upright, rounded, elegant script) is much like that found in P66. Furthermore, P90 has more affinity with P66 than with any other single manuscript, though it does not concur with P66 in its entirety.<\/p>\n\n<h6>P. Oxy. 4404<\/h6>\n<p>Containing Matthew 21:34-37, 43, 45, this manuscript could be the earliest extant manuscript of the NT in that the script is early Roman and therefore could be dated to the early second century.<\/p>\n<h5>The Chester Beatty Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>These manuscripts were purchased from a dealer in Egypt during the 1930s by Chester Beatty and by the University of Michigan. The three manuscripts in this collection are very early and contain a large portion of the NT text. P45 (c. 200) contains portions of all four Gospels and Acts; P46 (c. 125) has almost all of Paul’s epistles and Hebrews; and P47 (third century) contains Revelation 9–17.<\/p>\n<h6>P45 (Chester Beatty Papyrus I)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex has the four Gospels and Acts (Mt 20:24-32; 21:13-19; 25:41–26:39; Mk 4:36–9:31; 11:27–12:28; Lk 6:31–7:7; 9:26–14:33; Jn 4:51–5:2, 21-25; 10:7-25; 10:30–11:10, 18-36, 42-57; Acts 4:27–17:17). The order of books in the original intact manuscript was probably as follows: Matthew, John, Luke, Mark, Acts (the so-called Western order). This manuscript was dated by Kenyon to the early third century, a date that was confirmed by the papyrologists W. Schubart and H. I. Bell. This continues to be the date assigned to this manuscript in modern handbooks on textual criticism and critical editions of the Greek NT, but the consistent formation of certain letters suggests an earlier date—maybe sometime in the late second century.<\/p>\n<p>The scribe of P45 worked without any intention of exactly reproducing his source. He wrote with a great amount of freedom—harmonizing, smoothing out, substituting at will. In short, the scribe did not actually copy words. He saw through the language to its idea-content, and copied that in words of his own choosing, or in rearranged order. Thus, in the scribe of P45 we see an exegete and a paraphraser.<\/p>\n<h6>P46 (Chester Beatty Papyrus II)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex has most of Paul’s epistles (excluding the Pastorals) in this order: Romans 5:17–6:14; 8:15–15:9; 15:11–16:27; Hebrews 1:1–13:25; 1 Corinthians 1:1–16:22; 2 Corinthians 1:1–13:13; Ephesians 1:1–6:24; Galatians 1:1–6:18; Philippians 1:1–4:23; Colossians 1:1–4:18; 1 Thessalonians 1:1; 1:9–2:3; 5:5-9, 23-28 (with minor lacunae in each of the books).<\/p>\n<p>The manuscript was originally dated to the early third century. But others, since, have dated the manuscript earlier in the second century. The scribe who produced this manuscript used an early, excellent exemplar. He was a professional scribe because there are stichoi notations at the end of several books (see the conclusion of Romans, 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, Philippians). The stichoi were used by professionals to note how many lines had been copied for commensurate pay. Most likely, the ex officio of the scriptorium (perhaps connected with a church library) paginated the codex and indicated the stichoi. The scribe himself made a few corrections as he went, and then several other readers made corrections here and there.<\/p>\n<p>The text of P46 shows a strong affinity with B (especially in Ephesians, Colossians, and Hebrews) and next with א (Codex Sinaiticus). P46 agrees much less with the later representatives of the Alexandrian text. In short, P46 is proto-Alexandrian. In Hebrews, P46 and P13 display nearly the same text. Out of a total of 88 variation-units, there are 71 agreements and only 17 disagreements.<\/p>\n<h6>P47 (Chester Beatty Papyrus III)<\/h6>\n<p>This third-century codex contains Revelation 9:10–17:2. The text of P47 agrees more often with that of Codex Sinaiticus than with any other manuscript (including Codex Alexandrinus and Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus), though it often shows independence.<\/p>\n<h5>The Bodmer Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>These manuscripts were purchased by M. Martin Bodmer from a dealer in Egypt during the 1950s and 1960s. The three important papyri in this collection are P66 (c. 175, containing almost all of John), P72 (third century, having all of 1 and 2 Peter and Jude), and P75 (c. 200, containing large parts of Luke 3—John 15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h4\" id=\"P66\">P66 (Papyrus Bodmer II)<\/p>\n<p>This manuscript contains most of John’s Gospel (1:1–6:11; 6:35–14:26, 29-30; 15:2-26; 16:2-4, 6-7; 16:10–20:20, 22-23; 20:25–21:9). The manuscript does not include the pericope of the adulteress (7:53–8:11), making it the earliest witness to not include this spurious passage. The manuscript is usually dated as c. 200, but the renowned paleographer Herbert Hunger has argued that P66 should be dated to the first half, if not the first quarter, of the second century.<\/p>\n<p>According to recent studies, it seems evident that P66 has preserved the work of three individuals: the original scribe, a thoroughgoing corrector, and a minor corrector. With a practiced calligraphic hand, the original scribe of P66 wrote in larger print as he went along in order to fill out the codex. The large print throughout indicates that it was written to be read aloud to a Christian congregation. The text exhibits the scribe’s knowledge of other portions of Scripture (inasmuch as he harmonized John 6:69 to Matthew 16:16 and John 21:6 to Luke 5:5), his use of standard <em>nomina sacra<\/em> (a way of writing divine names), and his special use of <em>nomina sacra<\/em> for the words “cross” and “crucify.”<\/p>\n<p>The original scribe was quite free in his interaction with the text; he produced several singular readings that reveal his independent interpretation of the text. While the numerous scribal mistakes would seem to indicate that the scribe was inattentive, many of the singular readings—prior to correction—reveal that he was not detached from the narrative of the text. Rather, he became so absorbed in his reading that he often forgot the exact words he was copying. His task as a copyist was to duplicate the exemplar word for word, but this was frustrated by the fact that he was reading the text in logical semantic chunks and often became a coproducer of a new text. As a result, he continually had to stop his reading and make many in-process corrections. But he left several places uncorrected, which were later fixed by the <em>diorthotes<\/em> (official corrector). The finished product is quite good, presenting a text that is very close to the Alexandrian witnesses.<\/p>\n<h6>P72 (Papyrus Bodmer VII–VIII)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated late third century, has an interesting collection of writings in one codex: 1 Peter 1:1–5:14; 2 Peter 1:1–3:18; Jude 1:1-25; the Nativity of Mary, the apocryphal correspondence of Paul to the Corinthians, the eleventh ode of Solomon, Melito’s Homily on the Passover, a fragment of a hymn, the Apology of Phileas, and Psalms 33 and 34.<\/p>\n<p>Scholars think that four scribes took part in producing the entire manuscript. First Peter has clear Alexandrian affinities—especially with B. Second Peter and (especially) Jude display more of an uncontrolled type text (usually associated with the “Western” text), with several independent readings.<\/p>\n<h6>P75 (Papyrus Bodmer XIV–XV)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex contains most of Luke and John (Lk 3:18–4:2; 4:34–5:10; 5:37–18:18; 22:4–24:53; Jn 1:1–11:45, 48-57; 12:3–13:1, 8-9; 14:8-30; 15:7-8.) The manuscript does not include the pericope of the adulteress (7:53–8:11). The manuscript can be dated to the late second or early third century.<\/p>\n<p>The copyist of P75 was a literate scribe trained in making books. His craftsmanship shows through in his tight calligraphy and controlled copying. The handwriting displayed in this manuscript is typically called by paleographers the common angular type of the late second to early third century. The scribe’s Christianity shows in his abbreviations of the <em>nomina sacra<\/em><em>,<\/em> as well as in his abbreviation of the word “cross.” These are telltale signs of a scribe who belonged to the Christian community. Furthermore, the large typeface indicates that the manuscript was composed to be read aloud to a Christian congregation. The scribe even added a system of sectional divisions to aid any would-be lector. Thus, we have a manuscript written by a Christian for other Christians.<\/p>\n<p>There are several indications of the scribe’s Alexandrian orientation. First and foremost is his scriptoral acumen. He is the best of all the early Christian scribes, and his manuscript is an extremely accurate copy. P75 is the work of an extremely disciplined scribe who copied with the intention of being careful and accurate. Scholars generally agree that P75 displays the kind of text that was used in making Codex Vaticanus (there is 87 percent agreement between P75 and B). As such, textual scholars have a high regard for P75’s textual fidelity.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Other Papyrus Manuscripts<\/h5>\n<h6>P4 + P64 + P67<\/h6>\n<p>These three papyrus manuscripts are part of one codex dated <span>AD<\/span> 150–175. The manuscript was the work of a professional scribe, and the text is extremely accurate.<\/p>\n<h6>P32 (Rylands Papyrus 5)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, preserving Titus 1:11-15; 2:3-8, is dated c. 175, making it the earliest extant copy of any of the Pastoral Epistles. P32 shows agreement with א and with F and G. Since F and G (nearly identical manuscripts) go back to the same archetype, it is possible that P32 could be linked to the same source.<\/p>\n<h6>P52 (Rylands Papyrus 457)<\/h6>\n<p>This fragment, containing John 18:31-34, 37-38, is noteworthy because of its date: c. 110–125. Many scholars (F. Kenyon, H. I. Bell, A. Deissmann, and W. H. P. Hatch) have confirmed this dating. The manuscript came from the Fayum or Oxyrhynchus site. It was acquired in 1920 by Grenfell, but it remained unnoticed among hundreds of papyri until 1934, when C. H. Roberts recognized that this fragment preserves a few verses from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ImportantUncialManuscripts\">Important Uncial Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>The manuscripts typically classified as “uncial” are so designated to differentiate them from papyrus manuscripts. In a sense, this is a misnomer because the real difference has to do with the material they are written on—vellum (treated animal hide) as compared to papyrus—not the kind of letters used. Indeed, the papyri are also written in uncials (capital letters), but the term “uncial” typically describes the majuscule lettering that was prominent in fourth-century biblical texts, such as in א, A, B, C.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Sinaiticus (or א)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex contains the entire OT and the NT in this order: the four Gospels, the Pauline Epistles (including Hebrews), Acts, the General Epistles, Revelation. It also includes the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas. The codex cannot be earlier than 340 (the year Eusebius died) because the Eusebian sections of the text are indicated in the margins of the Gospels by a contemporary hand. Most scholars date it 350–375.<\/p>\n<p>This codex was discovered by Constantin von Tischendorf in St Catherine’s Monastery (situated at the foot of Mt Sinai). On a visit to the monastery in 1844 he noticed in a wastebasket some parchment leaves that were being used to light the lamps. He was allowed to take this waste paper, which proved to be 43 leaves from various parts of the Greek translation of the OT.<\/p>\n<p>In 1853 he made a second trip to the monastery and found nothing. In 1859, however, on his third trip, he found not only other parts of the OT but also the complete NT. He was finally able to persuade the monastery authorities to present the manuscript to the czar, the great patron of the Greek Catholic Church, who placed it in the Imperial Library in St Petersburg. The czar gave great honors to the monastery and its authorities, and everybody seemed well pleased. Later Tischendorf was charged with having stolen the manuscript from its lawful owners, but the better textual scholars do not accept that story.<\/p>\n\n<p>The manuscript remained in the Imperial Library until 1933, when it was purchased by the British Museum for the huge sum of £100,000 (about $500,000). Textual criticism made the headlines because one manuscript was bought for this much money, raised largely by public subscription during the Great Depression. The manuscript is now on display in the manuscript room of the museum, where it is considered one of its most prized possessions.<\/p>\n<p>The text of Sinaiticus is very closely related to that of Codex Vaticanus. They agree in presenting the purest type of text, usually called the Alexandrian text type. Tischendorf greatly used the textual evidence of Codex Sinaiticus in preparing his critical editions of the Greek NT. Tischendorf thought four scribes had originally produced the codex, whom he named scribes A, B, C, D. After reinvestigation, H. J. Milne and T. C. Skeat identified only three scribes: A (who wrote the historical and poetical books of the OT, as well as most of the NT), B (who wrote the Prophets and the Shepherd of Hermas), and D (who wrote some Psalms, Tobit, Judith, and 4 Maccabees, and redid small sections of the NT). Milne and Skeat demonstrated that scribe A of Codex Vaticanus was likely the same scribe as scribe D of Codex Sinaiticus. If this true, then א is contemporary with B—perhaps produced in the same scriptorium in Alexandria. Codex Sinaiticus provides a fairly reliable witness to the NT; however, the scribe was not as careful as the scribe of B.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Alexandrinus (A)<\/h5>\n<p>This is one of the three most important codices containing early copies of the whole Bible in Greek (the other two being the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus codexes). The name Alexandrinus comes from ancient records suggesting that it was copied in Egypt during the early part of the fifth century <span>AD<\/span>. The early history of this manuscript and its Egyptian provenance is partially revealed by its flyleaves. A note by Cyril of Lucar (patriarch of Alexandria and then of Constantinople in the 1620s) states that, according to tradition, it was written by Thecla, a noble lady of Egypt shortly after the Council of Nicaea (325) and that her name was originally inscribed at the end of the volume but the last page was lost due to mutilation. An Arabic note of the 13th or 14th century also says that the manuscript was written by “Thecla the martyr.” Another Arabic note says that is was presented to the patriarchal cell of Alexandria (c. 1098). Cyril of Lucar took the manuscript from Alexandria to Constantinople in 1621 and then gave it to Charles I of England in 1627, where it became part of the Royal Library, then later the British Museum.<\/p>\n<p>Only 773 of the original 820 or so pages still exist. The rest were lost as the book was passed down through the centuries. The surviving parts of Alexandrinus contain a Greek translation of the whole OT, the Apocrypha (including four books of Maccabees and Psalm 151), most of the NT, and some early Christian writings (of which the First and Second Epistles of Clement to the Corinthians are the most important).<\/p>\n<p>Frederick Kenyon thought the codex was the work of five scribes, to each of whom he designated a Roman numeral. According to Kenyon, scribes I and II copied the OT; scribe III did Matthew, Mark, 1 Corinthians 10:8—Philemon 1:25; scribe IV did Luke—Acts, General Epistles, Romans 1:1—1 Corinthians 10:8; and scribe V did Revelation. Milne and Skeat, however, argued that the whole codex was the work of two copyists (I and II). W. H. P. Hatch noted that many corrections have been made in the manuscript, most of them at an early date. Some of these corrections were introduced by the scribe himself, and others came from later hands.<\/p>\n<p>Evidently, the scribes of this codex used exemplars of varying quality for various sections of the NT. The exemplar used for the Gospels was of poor quality, reflecting a Byzantine text type. Its testimony in the Epistles is much better, and in Revelation it provides the best witness to the original text.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Codex Vaticanus (B)<\/h5>\n<p>Codex Vaticanus is the Vatican Manuscript, so named because it is the most famous manuscript in the Vatican Library in Rome. This manuscript has been in the Vatican’s library since at least 1475, but it was not made available to scholars, such as Constantin von Tischendorf and Samuel Tregelles, until the middle of the 19th century.<\/p>\n<p>At one time, the codex contained the whole Greek Bible, including most of the books of the Apocrypha, but it has lost many of its leaves. Originally it must have had about 820 leaves (1,640 pp), but now it has 759—617 in the OT and 142 in the NT. The major gaps of the manuscript are Genesis 1:1–46:28; 2 Samuel 2:5-7, 10-13; Psalms 106:27–138:6; Hebrews 9:14–13:25; the Pastoral Epistles; and Revelation. Each leaf measures ten and a half by ten inches (26.7 by 25.4 centimeters). Each page has three columns (two for the poetical books) with 40 to 44 lines to the column. The manuscript was written by two different scribes. It is dated in the early to middle part of the fourth century. It is not known where the manuscript originated, but it has been in the Vatican Library from the time of its earliest catalog in 1475.<\/p>\n\n<p>When Napoleon conquered Rome, he brought its treasures to Paris, including this manuscript. The scholar Hug identified it and called the attention of other scholars to it. After the downfall of Napoleon, the manuscript was returned to the Vatican Library. Competent textual scholars were not allowed to do careful work on it until a photographic edition was published in 1890. It is now on exhibit in the Vatican Library.<\/p>\n<p>The text of the Vatican Manuscript is much like that of Codex Sinaiticus. These are generally recognized as the two finest examples of the Alexandrian type of Greek text of the NT. The Greek text of the OT is very fine too, but it is not quite so important, as the original language of the OT was Hebrew. Virtually all the textual scholars since the days of Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort (who brought out their Greek Testament, including their theory of textual criticism, in 1881), recognize this neutral type of text as a very early text and a very pure text, an extremely accurate reproduction of what the original text must have been. Westcott and Hort called it a second-century text accurate in 999 out of 1,000 words so far as any matter of translatable difference was concerned. א and B are the finest examples of this type of text, but it is also found in a few other Greek uncial manuscripts, a few of the early translations, and in the writings of a few of the early church fathers. Since the days of Westcott and Hort, their theory has been confirmed by the discovery of some papyrus manuscripts, notably the Bodmer Papyri, discovered in the 1950s.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus (C)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex is a palimpsest (the original writing was erased and different words written on the same material). It originally contained the entire Bible but now has only parts of six OT books and portions of all NT books except 2 Thessalonians and 2 John. The single-column Bible text, written in the 5th century <span>AD<\/span>, was erased in the 12th century and replaced by a two-column text of a Greek translation of sermons or treatises by a certain Ephraem, a 4th-century Syrian church leader. Such a practice was common in periods of economic depression or when parchment was scarce. The original writing was scraped from the writing surface and the surface smoothed. Then new compositions could be written on the prepared surface. Using chemicals Tischendorf was able to read much of the erased document.<\/p>\n<p>The manuscript may have been brought from the east to Florence by a learned Greek named Andrew John Lascar in the time of Lorenzo de’Medici. Since Lascar was known as Rhyndacenus (from the river Rhyndacus), he probably came from the region of Phrygia (site of ancient Laodicea). Where the manuscript was prior to this is not known. The Ephraemi manuscript was brought to Italy in the early sixth century, where it became the property of the Medici family. Catherine de’Medici took it to France, where it remains today.<\/p>\n<p>The text of this manuscript is mixed—it is compounded from all the major text types, agreeing frequently with the later koine of Byzantine type, which most scholars regard as the least valuable type of NT text.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Bezae (D)<\/h5>\n<p>This is a Greek-Latin diglot containing Matthew—Acts, 3 John, with lacunae. Most scholars date it late fourth or early fifth century (c. 400). Some scholars think the codex was produced in either Egypt or North Africa by a scribe whose mother tongue was Latin. Another scholar (D. C. Parker) has argued that it was copied in Beirut, a center of Latin legal studies during the fifth century, where both Latin and Greek were used. Evidently, it was produced by a scribe who knew Latin better than Greek, and then was corrected by several scribes. In any event, the codex somehow came into the hands of Theodore Beza, French scholar and successor to Calvin. Beza gave it to the Cambridge University Library in 1581.<\/p>\n<p>This codex is probably the most controversial of the NT uncials because of its marked independence. Its many additions, omissions, and alterations (especially in Luke and Acts) are the work of a significant theologian. A few earlier manuscripts (P29, P38, P48, and 0171) appear to be precursors to the type of text found in D, which is considered the principal witness of the Western text-type. Thus, Codex Bezae could be a copy of an earlier revised edition. This reviser must have been a scholar who had a propensity for adding historical, biographical, and geographical details. More than anything, he was intent on filling in gaps in the narrative by adding circumstantial details.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Washingtonianus, or The Freer Gospels (W)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex, dated around 400, has the four Gospels and Acts. It is often referred to as the Freer Gospels—named after its owner, Charles Freer. The codex likely came from the ruins of a monastery near Giza. The handwriting is quite similar to that found in a fifth-century fragment of the book of Enoch found at Akhmim in 1886.<\/p>\n<p>Codex W was copied from a parent manuscript (exemplar) that had been pieced together from several different manuscripts. This is obvious because the textual presentation of W is noticeably variegated and even the stratification of the text is matched by similar variations in paragraphing. The scribe who collated the parent manuscript drew upon various sources to put together his Gospel codex. It is likely that the scribe of the parent manuscript used a text that came from North Africa (the “Western” text) for the first part of Mark, and the scribe of W used manuscripts from Antioch for Matthew and the second part of Luke to fill the gaps in the more ancient manuscript he was copying. Detailed textual analysis reveals the variegated textual stratifications of W, as follows: in Matthew the text is Byzantine; in Mark the text is first Western (1:1–5:30), then Caesarean in Mark 5:31–16:20 (akin to P45); in Luke the text is first Alexandrian (1:1–8:12), then Byzantine. John is more complicated because the first part of John (1:1–5:11), which fills a quire, was the work of a seventh-century scribe who must have replaced a damaged quire. (W<span>s<\/span> designates the work of this scribe.) This first section has a mixture of Alexandrian and Western readings, as does the rest of John.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex 1739<\/h5>\n<p>This tenth-century codex has Acts and the Epistles. The manuscript was discovered at Mt Athos in 1879 by E. von der Goltz. The manuscript has strong textual affinities with P46, B, 1739, Coptic Sahidic, Coptic Boharic, Clement, and Origen. The relationship between P46, B, and 1739 is remarkable because 1739 is a tenth-century manuscript that was copied from a fourth-century manuscript of excellent quality. According to a colophon, the scribe of 1739 for the Pauline Epistles followed a manuscript that came from Caesarea in the library of Pamphilus and that contained an Origenian text. The three manuscripts, P46, B, and 1739, form a clear textual line: from P46 (early second century) to B (early fourth century) to 1739 (tenth century based on fourth century).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTextoftheNewTestament\">The Text of the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The original text of the NT is the “published” text—that is, the text as it was in its final edited form and released for circulation in the Christian community. For some books of the NT, there is little difference between the original composition and the published text. After the author wrote or dictated his work, he (or an associate) made the final editorial corrections and then released it for distribution. As is the case for books published in modern times, so in ancient times, the original writing of the author is not always the same as what is published—due to the editorial process. Nonetheless, the author is credited with the final edited text, and the published book is attributed to the author and considered the autograph. This autograph is the original published text. Of course, in this case the autographs do not exist, so scholars have to rely on copies to recover or reconstruct the original wording.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars think it is impossible to recover the original text of the Greek NT because they have not been able to reconstruct the early history of textual transmission. Other modern scholars are less pessimistic but still quite guarded in affirming the possiblity. And yet others are optimistic because we possess many early manuscripts of excellent quality and because our view of the early period of textual transmission has been getting clearer and clearer.<\/p>\n<p>When we speak of recovering the text of the NT, we are referring to individual books of the NT, not to the entire volume per se, because each book (or group of books—such as the Pauline Epistles) had its own unique history of textual transmission. The earliest extant copy of an entire NT text is the one preserved in Codex Sinaiticus (written about <span>AD<\/span> 375). (Codex Vaticanus lacks the Pastoral Epistles and Revelation.) Prior to the fourth century, the NT was circulated in its various parts: as a single book or a group of books (such as the four Gospels or the Pauline Epistles). Manuscripts from the late first century to the third century have been found with individual books such as Matthew (P1, P77), Mark (P88), Luke (P69), John (P5, 22, 52, 66), Acts (P91), Revelation (P18, 47), or containing groups of books, such as the four Gospels with Acts (P45), the Pauline Epistles (P30, P46, P92), the Petrine Epistles and Jude (P72). Each of the books of the NT has had its own textual history and has been preserved with varying degrees of accuracy. Nonetheless, all of the books were altered from the original state due to the process of manual copying decade after decade and century after century. And the text of each of the books needs to be recovered.<\/p>\n<p>The NT text was affected with many variations in its early history. In the late first and early second century, the oral traditions and the written word existed side by side with equal status—especially with respect to the material of the Gospels. Often, the text was changed by scribes attempting to conform the written message to the oral tradition or attempting to conform one Gospel account to another. By the end of the second century and into the third century, many of the significant variant readings entered into the textual stream.<\/p>\n<p>The early period of textual transmission, however, was not completely marred by textual infidelity and scribal liberty. There were those scribes who copied the text faithfully and reverently—that is, they recognized that they were copying a sacred text written by an apostle. The formalization of canonization did not ascribe this sacredness to the text. Canonization came about as the result of common, historical recognition of the sacredness of various NT books. Certain NT books, such as the four Gospels, Acts, and Paul’s epistles were considered inspired literature from the onset. As such, certain scribes copied them with reverential fidelity.<\/p>\n<p>Other scribes, however, felt free to make “improvements” in the text—either in the interest of doctrine and harmonization or due to the influence of a competitive oral tradition. The manuscripts produced in such a manner created a kind of “popular text”—i.e., an uncontrolled text. (This text type used to be called the “Western text,” but scholars now recognize this as a misnomer.)<\/p>\n<p>During the second century, there were a few men who produced recensions of the NT text. According to Eusebius, Theodotus (and his followers) altered the text for their own purposes. In the middle of the second century, Marcion expunged his copies of the Gospel according to Luke of all references to the Jewish background of Jesus, and Tatian’s harmony of the Gospels contains several textual alterations that gave support to ascetic views. And yet another recendor created the D-type text for the Gospels and Acts. This theologically minded redactor, living in the late second or third century, created a text that had short-lived popularity. Three third-century papyri, P29, P38, P48, each containing a portion from the book of Acts, may be precursors to the D-type text in Acts. But there are other papyri containing portions of Acts that provide even earlier testimony to a purer form of Acts—namely, P45 (c. 150) and P91 (c. 200), thereby showing that the D-type text of Acts did not necessarily antedate the purer form.<\/p>\n<p>Besides these endeavors—which are all noted for creating textual impurities—there was no recension of the NT text in the second century. Rather, it was a period in which there were scribes who exercised freedom in copying and those who demonstrated acumen. The manuscripts produced by the latter are those that come closest to preserving the original text. A prime example of an accurate late-second-century manuscript is P75.<\/p>\n<p>It is a well-known fact that the text produced by the scribe of P75 is a very accurate manuscript. It is also well-known that P75 was the kind of manuscript used in formulating Codex Vaticanus—the readings of P75 and B are remarkably similar. Prior to the discovery of P75, certain scholars thought Codex Vaticanus was the work of a fourth-century recension; others (chiefly Hort) thought it must trace back to a very early and accurate copy. Hort said that Codex Vaticanus preserves “not only a very ancient text, but a very pure line of a very ancient text” (Westcott and Hort, <em>The<\/em> <em>Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> pp 250–51). P75 appears to have shown that Hort was right.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the discovery of P75, many textual scholars were convinced that the second- and third-century papyri displayed a text in flux, a text characterized only by individual independence. The Chester Beatty Papyrus, P45, and the Bodmer Papyri, P66 and P72 (in 2 Peter and Jude), show this kind of independence. Scholars thought that scribes at Alexandria must have used several such texts to produce a good recension—as is exhibited in Codex Vaticanus. But we now know that Codex Vaticanus was not the result of a scholarly recension, resulting from editorial selection across the various textual histories. Rather, it is now quite clear that Codex Vaticanus was simply a copy (with some modifications) of a manuscript much like P75, not a fourth-century recension.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars may point out that this does not automatically mean that P75 and B represent the original text. What it does mean, they say, is that we have a second-century manuscript showing great affinity with a fourth-century manuscript whose quality has been highly esteemed. But various scholars have demonstrated that there was no Alexandrian recension before the time of P75 (late second century) and B (early fourth) and that both these manuscripts represent a relatively pure form of preservation of a relatively pure line of descent from the original text.<\/p>\n<p>The current view about the early text is that certain scribes in Alexandria and\/or scribes familiar with Alexandrian scriptoral practices (perhaps those in Oxyrhynchus) were probably responsible for maintaining a relatively pure text throughout the second, third, and fourth centuries. The Alexandrian scribes, associated with or actually employed by the scriptorium of the great Alexandrian library and\/or members of the scriptorium associated with the catechetical school at Alexandria (called the <em>Didaskelion<\/em>), were trained philologists, grammarians, and textual critics. Their work on the NT was not recensional—that is, it was not an organized emendation of the text. Rather, the work of purification and preservation was probably done here and there by various individuals trained in text criticism. This is apparent in the production of P66, which contains the Gospel of John. This manuscript was probably produced in an Egyptian scriptorium by a novice scribe who made many blunders, which were subsequently corrected by another scribe working in the same scriptorium. The first text produced by the novice could be classified as being very “free,” but the corrected text is far more accurate. (See the discussion on this manuscript above.)<\/p>\n<p>What appears to have happened with the copying of the NT text in the early period in Egypt has been poignantly characterized by Zuntz. He said that when a book was immensely popular (such as Homer’s <em>Iliad<\/em> and <em>Odyssey,<\/em> or Plato’s writings), it was copied with wild enthusiasm by novice and scholar alike. But when grammarians and scribes got ahold of it, they tried to rid it of textual corruption. In the process, however, they may have obliterated some authentic readings, but not many. Thus, the popular text (also known as the “Western text”) could have preserved the original wording in some cases. The popular or free kind of text is displayed in several third-century manuscripts: P9, P37, P40, P45, P72, and P78.<\/p>\n<p>In brief, this popular text is usually displayed in any kind of manuscript that was not produced by Alexandrian influences. This text, given to independence, is not as trustworthy as the Alexandrian text type. But because the Alexandrian text is known as a polished text, the popular text sometimes preserved the original wording. When a variant reading has the support of “Western” and Alexandrian texts, it is very likely original; but when the two are divided, the Alexandrian witnesses more often preserve the original wording.<\/p>\n<p>One dilemma still remains for some textual critics. They cannot explain how a P75\/B-type text coexisted with a Western-type text in the second century. All that can be said is that the Western text generally appears to be inferior to the P75\/B-type text. Of course, this kind of judgment troubles certain scholars, who point out that the esteem given to B and P75 is based on a subjective appreciation of the kind of text they contain (as over against the Western text) rather than on any kind of theoretical reconstruction of the early transmission of the text. This same subjective estimation was at work when Westcott and Hort decided that B was intrinsically superior to D (see their <em>Introduction,<\/em> pp 32–42). Yet the praxis of textual criticism time and again demonstrates that the P75\/B-type text is intrinsically superior to the Western text.<\/p>\n<p>In the final analysis, the manuscripts that represent a pure preservation of the original text are usually those called “Alexandrian.” Some scholars, such as Bruce Metzger, have called the earlier manuscripts “protoAlexandrian,” for they (or manuscripts like them) are thought of as being used to compose an Alexandrian-type text. However, this is looking at things from the perspective of the fourth century. We should look at things from the second century onward and then compare fourth-century manuscripts to those of the second. The second-century manuscripts could still be called “Alexandrian” in the sense that they were produced under Alexandrian influences. Perhaps a distinguishing terminology could be “early Alexandrian” (pre-Constantine) and “later Alexandrian” (post-Constantine). Manuscripts designated as “early Alexandrian” would generally be purer, less editorialized. Manuscripts designated “later Alexandrian” would display editorialization, as well as the influence of other textual traditions.<\/p>\n<p>The “early Alexandrian” text is reflected in many second- and third-century manuscripts. On the top of the list is P75 (c. 175), the work of a competent and careful scribe. Not far behind in quality is P4+P64+P67 (c. 150), the work of an excellent copyist. Other extremely good copies are P1 (c. 200), P20 (early third century), P23 (c. 200), P27 (third century), P28 (third century), P32 (c. 150), P39 (third century), P46 (c. 125), P65 (third century), P66 (in its corrected form—P66<span>c<\/span>; c. 150), P70 (third century), P77 (c. 150), P87 (c. 125), P90 (c. 175), and P91 (c. 200). Several of these manuscripts have been placed in the “strict” category by textual critics Kurt and Barbara Aland—that is, they exhibit “strict” scribal control and therefore are accurate copies of an exemplar, if not the original. These manuscripts are P1, P23, P35, P37, P39, P64\/67, P65, P70, and P75.<\/p>\n<p>The “later Alexandrian” text, which displays editorial polishing, is exhibited in a few manuscripts, such as א (fourth century), T (fifth century), ע (seventh century), L (eighth century), 33 (ninth century), 1739 (a tenth-century manuscript copied from a fourth-century Alexandrian manuscript much like P46), and 579 (13th century). Beginning in the fifth century, Byzantine-type manuscripts began to make their influence in Egypt. Some manuscripts dated around 400 that came from Egypt clearly reflect this influence; Codex Alexandrinus (A) is probably the best example. Other Egyptian manuscripts of this era, such as Codex Sinaiticus (א) and Codex Washingtonianus (W) display large-scale harmonization, which cannot be directly linked to any kind of recension.<\/p>\n<p>At the end of the third century, another kind of Greek text came into being and then grew in popularity until it became the dominant text-type throughout Christendom. This is the text-type first instigated by Lucian of Antioch, according to Jerome (in his introduction to his Latin translation of the Gospels). Lucian’s text was a definite recension (i.e., a purposely created edition)—as opposed to the Alexandrian text-type that came about as the result of a process wherein the Alexandrian scribes, upon comparing many manuscripts, attempted to preserve the best text—thereby serving more as textual critics than editors. Of course, the Alexandrians did do some editing—such as we would call copy-editing. The Lucianic text is the outgrowth and culmination of the popular text; it is characterized by smoothness of language, which is achieved by the removal of obscurities and awkward grammatical constructions and by the conflation of variant readings. Lucian (and\/or his associates) must have used many different kinds of manuscripts of varying qualities to produce a harmonized, edited NT text. The kind of editorial work that went into the Lucianic text is what we would call substantive editing.<\/p>\n<p>Lucian’s text was produced prior to the Diocletian persecution (c. 303), during which time many copies of the NT were confiscated and destroyed. Not long after this period of devastation, Constantine came to power and then recognized Christianity as the state religion. There was, of course, a great need for copies of the NT to be made and distributed to churches throughout the Mediterranean world. It was at this time that Lucian’s text began to be propagated by bishops going out from the Antiochan school to churches throughout the East, taking the text with them. Lucian’s text soon became the standard text of the Eastern church and formed the basis for the Byzantine text—and is thus the ultimate authority for the Textus Receptus.<\/p>\n<p>While Lucian was forming his recension of the NT text, the Alexandrian text was taking on its final shape. As was mentioned earlier, the formation of the Alexandrian text-type was the result of a process (as opposed to a single editorial recension). The formation of the Alexandrian text involved minor textual criticism (i.e., selecting variant readings among various manuscripts) and copyediting (i.e., producing a readable text). There was far less tampering with the text in the Alexandrian text-type than in the Lucian, and the underlying manuscripts for the Alexandrian text-type were superior to those used by Lucian. Perhaps Hesychius was responsible for giving the Alexandrian text its final shape, and Athanasius of Alexandria may have been the one who made this text the archetypal text for Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>As the years went by, there were fewer and fewer Alexandrian manuscripts produced, and more and more Byzantine manuscripts manufactured. Very few Egyptians continued to read Greek (with the exception of those in St Catherine’s Monastery, the site of the discovery of Codex Sinaiticus), and the rest of the Mediterranean world turned to Latin. It was only those in the Greek-speaking churches in Greece and Byzantium that continued to make copies of the Greek text. For century after century—from the 6th to the 14th—the great majority of NT manuscripts were produced in Byzantium, all bearing the same kind of text. When the first Greek NT was printed (c. 1525), it was based on a Greek text that Erasmus had compiled, using a few late Byzantine manuscripts. This printed text, with minor revisions, became the Textus Receptus.<\/p>\n<p>Beginning in the 17th century, earlier manuscripts began to be discovered—manuscripts with a text that differed from that found in the Textus Receptus. Around 1630, Codex Alexandrinus was brought to England. An early fifth-century manuscript, containing the entire NT, it provided a good, early witness to the NT text (it is an especially good witness to the original text of Revelation). Two hundred years later, a German scholar named Constantin von Tischendorf discovered Codex Sinaiticus in St Catherine’s Monastery (located near Mt Sinai). The manuscript, dated around <span>AD<\/span> 360, is one of the two oldest vellum (treated animal hide) manuscripts of the Greek NT. The earliest vellum manuscript, Codex Vaticanus, had been in the Vatican’s library since at least 1481, but it had not been made available to scholars until the middle of the 19th century. This manuscript, dated slightly earlier (<span>AD<\/span> 350) than Codex Sinaiticus, had both the OT and NT in Greek, excluding the last part of the NT (Hebrews 9:15 to Revelation 22:21 and the Pastoral Epistles). A hundred years of textual criticism has determined that this manuscript is one of the most accurate and reliable witnesses to the original text.<\/p>\n<p>Other early and important manuscripts were discovered in the 19th century. Through the tireless labors of men like Constantin von Tischendorf, Samuel Tregelles, and F. H. A. Scrivener, manuscripts such as Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, Codex Zacynthius, and Codex Augiensis were deciphered, collated, and published.<\/p>\n<p>As the various manuscripts were discovered and made public, certain scholars labored to compile a Greek text that would more closely represent the original text than did the Textus Receptus. Around 1700 John Mill produced an improved Textus Receptus, and in the 1730s Johannes Albert Bengel (known as the father of modern textual and philological studies in the NT) published a text that deviated from the Textus Receptus according to the evidence of earlier manuscripts.<\/p>\n<p>In the 1800s certain scholars began to abandon the Textus Receptus. Karl Lachman, a classical philologist, produced a fresh text (in 1831) that represented the fourth-century manuscripts. Samuel Tregelles (self-taught in Latin, Hebrew, and Greek), laboring throughout his entire lifetime, concentrated all of his efforts in publishing one Greek text (which came out in six parts, from 1857 to 1872). As is stated in the introduction to this work, Tregelles’s goal was “to exhibit the text of the NT in the very words in which it has been transmitted on the evidence of ancient authority.” Henry Alford also compiled a Greek text based upon the best and earliest manuscripts. In his preface to <em>The Greek New Testament<\/em> (a multivolume commentary on the Greek NT, published in 1849), Alford said he labored for the “demolition of the unworthy and pedantic reverence for the received text, which stood in the way of all chance of discovering the genuine word of God.”<\/p>\n<p>During this same era, Tischendorf was devoting a lifetime of labor to discovering manuscripts and producing accurate editions of the Greek NT. In a letter to his fiancé he wrote, “I am confronted with a sacred task, the struggle to regain the original form of the NT.” In fulfillment of his desire, he discovered Codex Sinaiticus, deciphered the palimpsest Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, collated countless manuscripts, and produced several editions of the Greek NT (the eighth edition is considered the best).<\/p>\n<p>Aided by the work of the previous scholars, two British men, Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort, worked together for 28 years to produce a volume entitled <em>The New Testament in the Original Greek<\/em> (1881). Along with this publication, they made known their theory (which was chiefly Hort’s) that Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus (along with a few other early manuscripts) represented a text that most closely replicated the original writing. They called this text the Neutral Text. (According to their studies, the Neutral Text described certain manuscripts that had the least amount of textual corruption.) This is the text that Westcott and Hort relied upon for compiling their volume.<\/p>\n<p>The 19th century was a fruitful era for the recovery of the Greek NT; the 20th century, no less so. Those living in the 20th century have witnessed the discovery of the Oxyrhynchus Papyri, the Chester Beatty Papyri, and the Bodmer Papyri. To date, there are nearly 100 papyri containing portions of the NT—several of which date from the late first century to the early fourth century. These significant discoveries, providing scholars with many ancient manuscripts, have greatly enhanced the effort to recover the original wording of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>At the beginning of the 20th century, Eberhard Nestle used the best editions of the Greek NT produced in the 19th century to compile a text that represented the majority consensus. The work of making new editions was carried on by his son for several years, and then came under the care of Kurt Aland. The latest edition (the 27th) of Nestle-Aland’s <em>Novum Testamentum Graece<\/em> appeared in 1993. The same Greek text appears in another popular volume published by the United Bible Societies, called the <em>Greek New Testament<\/em> (fourth edition). Aland has argued that the Nestle-Aland text, 27th edition (NA<span>27<\/span>), comes closer to the original text of the NT than did Tischendorf or Westcott and Hort. And in several writings he intimates that NA<span>27<\/span> may very well be the original text. Though few, if any, scholars would agree with this, the 27th edition of the Nestle-Aland text is regarded by many as representing the latest and best in textual scholarship.<\/p>\n<h5>New Testament Textual Criticism<\/h5>\n<p>Textual critics working with ancient literature universally acknowledge the supremacy of earlier manuscripts over later ones. Textual critics not working with the NT would love to have the same kind of early witnesses that biblical scholars possess. In fact, many of them work with manuscripts written 1,000 years after the autographs were composed! We all marvel that the Dead Sea Scrolls have provided a text that is nearly 800 years closer to the originals than the Masoretic manuscripts, and yet many of the Dead Sea manuscripts are still over 600 to 800 years removed from the time of original composition. NT textual critics have a great advantage!<\/p>\n<p>The 19th-century NT textual scholars—such as Lachmann, Tregelles, Tischendorf, Westcott and Hort—worked on the basis that the earliest witnesses are the best witnesses. Some textual scholars have continued this line of recovery using the testimony of the earlier witnesses. But many textual scholars since the time of Westcott and Hort have been less inclined to produce editions based on the theory that the earliest reading is the best. Most present-day textual critics are more inclined to endorse the maxim: the reading that is most likely original is the one that best explains the variants.<\/p>\n<p>This maxim (or “canon” as it is sometimes called), as good as it is, produces conflicting results. For example, two scholars, using this same principle to examine the same variant unit, will not agree. One will argue that one variant was produced by a copyist attempting to emulate the author’s style; the other will claim the same variant has to be original because it accords with the author’s style. One will argue that one variant was produced by an orthodox scribe attempting to rid the text of a reading that could be used to promote heterodoxy or heresy; another will claim that the same variant has to be original because it is orthodox and accords with Christian doctrine (thus a heterodox or heretical scribe must have changed it). Furthermore, this principle allows for the possibility that the reading selected for the text can be taken from any manuscript of any date. This can lead to subjective eclecticism.<\/p>\n<p>Modern textual scholars have attempted to temper the subjectivism by employing a method called “reasoned eclecticism.” This kind of eclecticism applies a combination of internal and external considerations, whereby the character of the variants is evaluated in light of the manuscripts’ evidence and vice versa. This is supposed to produce a balanced view and serve as a check against purely subjective tendencies.<\/p>\n<p>The Alands favor the same kind of approach, calling it the local-genealogical method, which is defined as follows:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>It is impossible to proceed from the assumption of a manuscript stemma, and on the basis of a full review and analysis of the relationships obtaining among the variety of interrelated branches in the manuscript tradition, to undertake a recension of the data as one would do with other Greek texts. Decisions must be made one by one, instance by instance. This method has been characterized as eclecticism, but wrongly so. After carefully establishing the variety of readings offered in a passage and the possibilities of their interpretation, it must always then be determined afresh on the basis of external and internal criteria which of these readings (and frequently they are quite numerous) is the original, from which the others may be regarded as derivative. From the perspective of our present knowledge, this “local-genealogical” method (if it must be given a name) is the only one which meets the requirements of the NT textual tradition. (Introduction to <em>Novum Testamentum Graece,<\/em> 26th edition)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>The “local-genealogical” method assumes that for any given variation unit any manuscript (or manuscripts) may have preserved the original text. Applying this method produces an extremely uneven documentary presentation of the text. Anyone studying the critical apparatus of NA<span>27<\/span> will detect that there is not an even documentary presentation. The eclecticism is dispersed throughout the text.<\/p>\n<p>“Reasoned eclecticism” and\/or the “local-genealogical” method tend to give priority to internal evidence over external evidence. But it has to be the other way around if we are going to recover the original text. This was Westcott and Hort’s opinion. With respect to their compilation of <em>The New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> Hort wrote, “Documentary evidence has been in most cases allowed to confer the place of honour against internal evidence” (<em>The Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> p 17).<\/p>\n<p>In this respect, Westcott and Hort need to be revived. Earnest Colwell was of the same mind when he wrote “Hort Redivivus: A Plea and a Program.” Colwell decried the growing tendency to rely entirely on the internal evidence of readings, without serious consideration of documentary evidence. He called upon scholars to make an attempt to reconstruct a history of the manuscript tradition. The abundance of manuscripts—several of which are very early—will aid scholars in this ongoing task.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BIBLE*, Manuscripts and Text of the (New Testament) Copies of the NT books produced by scribes and editions made from these copies. In the centuries prior to the simultaneous-multiple production of copies via dictation (wherein many scribes in a scriptorium transcribed a text dictated to them by one reader), all manuscript copies were made singly—each scribe producing a copy from an exemplar. Prior to the 15th century, when Johannes Gutenberg invented movable type for the printing press, all ...","summary_en":"BIBLE*, Manuscripts and Text of the (New Testament) Copies of the NT books produced by scribes and editions made from these copies. In the centuries prior to the simultaneous-multiple production of copies via dictation (wherein many scribes in a scriptorium transcribed a text dictated to them by one reader), all manuscript copies were made singly—each scribe producing a copy from an exemplar. Prior to the 15th century, when Johannes Gutenberg invented movable type for the printing press, all ...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":38396,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Wilderness","title_en":"Wilderness","content_ro":"<h3>WILDERNESS<\/h3>\n<p>Land that is basically wild and sparsely inhabited or unfit for permanent human settlement. It may be desert, mountains, forest, or marsh.<\/p>\n<p>In the Near East the wilderness is characteristically dry, desolate, and mostly rock and sand. It is rough, uneven, and interlaced with dry watercourses. The wilderness is not completely barren but provides seasonal pasture for flocks, depending on the rainfall.<\/p>\n<p>Joel 2:22 declares that “the pastures of the wilderness are green,” and Psalm 65:12 states that the pastures of the wilderness drip with richness. But Jeremiah says that “the pastures of the wilderness are dried up” (Jer 23:10; cf. Jl 1:20). And Job refers to the wilderness as a land where no human can live (Jb 38:26); it is a place for various animals and birds, such as wild asses, jackals, vultures, and owls (Ps 102:6; Jer 2:24; Is 13:22; 34:13-15).<\/p>\n<p>Certain wilderness tracts are identified by name and are related to definite cities, persons, or events. Hagar wandered in the wilderness of Beersheba (Gn 21:14). In the exodus from Egypt, the Israelites traversed the following wildernesses: Shur (Ex 15:22), Etham (Nm 33:8), Sin (Ex 16:1), Sinai (19:1-2), Zin (Nm 13:21; 20:1), Paran (13:26), Kadesh (Ps 29:8), Moab (Dt 2:8), and Kedemoth (v 26). When David was fleeing from Saul, David hid in the hill country of the wilderness of Ziph (1 Sm 23:14-15), in the wilderness of Maon (vv 24-25), and in the wilderness of En-gedi (24:1).<\/p>\n<p>In spite of the comparative desolation of the wilderness, villages or towns are sometimes associated with a wilderness setting. Joshua 15:61-62 lists the names of six cities and their villages “in the wilderness.” The future joy of the towns of the desert is proclaimed by Isaiah (Is 42:11).<\/p>\n<p>The wilderness is associated with both austerity and temptation. Elijah, by his way of life and his dress, is often thought of in connection with the wilderness. His successor, Elisha, had occasion to minister in the wilderness of Edom (2 Kgs 3:4-27).<\/p>\n<p>Isaiah prophesied of the message of John the Baptist, who preached in the wilderness of Judea (Is 40:3; Mt 3:1-3; Mk 1:2-4; Lk 3:1-6; Jn 1:23). Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, was led by the Spirit into the wilderness for 40 days. There he was tempted by the devil (cf. Lk 4:1-2), but there also angels ministered to him (Mk 1:13). The anchorites (hermits) of Egypt and the Qumran community near the Dead Sea used the wilderness as an escape from the evils of urban life. Jesus, however, used the wilderness as a place of prayer and communion with the Father (Lk 5:16).<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Desert; Wilderness Wanderings.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>WILDERNESS<\/h3>\n<p>Land that is basically wild and sparsely inhabited or unfit for permanent human settlement. It may be desert, mountains, forest, or marsh.<\/p>\n<p>In the Near East the wilderness is characteristically dry, desolate, and mostly rock and sand. It is rough, uneven, and interlaced with dry watercourses. The wilderness is not completely barren but provides seasonal pasture for flocks, depending on the rainfall.<\/p>\n<p>Joel 2:22 declares that “the pastures of the wilderness are green,” and Psalm 65:12 states that the pastures of the wilderness drip with richness. But Jeremiah says that “the pastures of the wilderness are dried up” (Jer 23:10; cf. Jl 1:20). And Job refers to the wilderness as a land where no human can live (Jb 38:26); it is a place for various animals and birds, such as wild asses, jackals, vultures, and owls (Ps 102:6; Jer 2:24; Is 13:22; 34:13-15).<\/p>\n<p>Certain wilderness tracts are identified by name and are related to definite cities, persons, or events. Hagar wandered in the wilderness of Beersheba (Gn 21:14). In the exodus from Egypt, the Israelites traversed the following wildernesses: Shur (Ex 15:22), Etham (Nm 33:8), Sin (Ex 16:1), Sinai (19:1-2), Zin (Nm 13:21; 20:1), Paran (13:26), Kadesh (Ps 29:8), Moab (Dt 2:8), and Kedemoth (v 26). When David was fleeing from Saul, David hid in the hill country of the wilderness of Ziph (1 Sm 23:14-15), in the wilderness of Maon (vv 24-25), and in the wilderness of En-gedi (24:1).<\/p>\n<p>In spite of the comparative desolation of the wilderness, villages or towns are sometimes associated with a wilderness setting. Joshua 15:61-62 lists the names of six cities and their villages “in the wilderness.” The future joy of the towns of the desert is proclaimed by Isaiah (Is 42:11).<\/p>\n<p>The wilderness is associated with both austerity and temptation. Elijah, by his way of life and his dress, is often thought of in connection with the wilderness. His successor, Elisha, had occasion to minister in the wilderness of Edom (2 Kgs 3:4-27).<\/p>\n<p>Isaiah prophesied of the message of John the Baptist, who preached in the wilderness of Judea (Is 40:3; Mt 3:1-3; Mk 1:2-4; Lk 3:1-6; Jn 1:23). Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, was led by the Spirit into the wilderness for 40 days. There he was tempted by the devil (cf. Lk 4:1-2), but there also angels ministered to him (Mk 1:13). The anchorites (hermits) of Egypt and the Qumran community near the Dead Sea used the wilderness as an escape from the evils of urban life. Jesus, however, used the wilderness as a place of prayer and communion with the Father (Lk 5:16).<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Desert; Wilderness Wanderings.<\/p>","summary_ro":"WILDERNESS Land that is basically wild and sparsely inhabited or unfit for permanent human settlement. It may be desert, mountains, forest, or marsh. In the Near East the wilderness is characteristically dry, desolate, and mostly rock and sand. It is rough, uneven, and interlaced with dry watercourses. The wilderness is not completely barren but provides seasonal pasture for flocks, depending on the rainfall. Joel 2:22 declares that “the pastures of the wilderness are green,” and Psalm 65:12 ...","summary_en":"WILDERNESS Land that is basically wild and sparsely inhabited or unfit for permanent human settlement. It may be desert, mountains, forest, or marsh. In the Near East the wilderness is characteristically dry, desolate, and mostly rock and sand. It is rough, uneven, and interlaced with dry watercourses. The wilderness is not completely barren but provides seasonal pasture for flocks, depending on the rainfall. Joel 2:22 declares that “the pastures of the wilderness are green,” and Psalm 65:12 ...","source":"Articles\/W.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"24":[{"id":42069,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Pharisees","title_en":"The Pharisees","content_ro":"<h3>The Pharisees<\/h3>\n<p>The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the <em>hasidim<\/em> (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obedient Jews. They taught strict adherence to the law, not only the written law of Moses (<em>torah<\/em>), but also the oral traditions which they claimed Moses had passed down to them. Their goal was to defend the written law against any possible infringement. They were God-fearing and law-abiding people. They were known for passing their interpretations from generation to generation by word of mouth, establishing an oral tradition concerning legal matters. They made the law applicable by extracting from it specific guidelines for many possible situations. They argued that if the law were obeyed by all, the nation would be purged of sin and God would establish his Kingdom over all the nations. This gave their concern for obedience a goal in the future. The traditions of the Pharisees developed into the rabbinic writings known as the <em>Mishnah<\/em> and the <em>Talmud<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>Although the Pharisees were small in number, their influence on Israel was widespread (see Matt 15:12-14; see also Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.8.14; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.5). The primary influence of the Pharisees was in the local synagogue communities, while the Sadducees were more influential in the worship at the Temple in Jerusalem and in the Sanhedrin, the Jewish high council.<\/p>\n<p>Unlike the Sadducees, the Pharisees had a strong belief in the resurrection of the dead (see Acts 23:6-8). After the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Pharisees provided leadership and direction for the people of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus often came into conflict with the Pharisees, accusing them of hypocrisy and of elevating human rules over God’s righteous standards. Jesus opposed the Pharisees because they were leading people away from God’s plan for redemption. They were the theological shepherds of Israel, but Jesus castigated them as hypocrites for their perversions of doctrine and practice (see Matt 23). And the Pharisees were antagonistic toward Jesus, rejecting both him and his work, largely because of his shocking disregard of their traditions (see e.g., Matt 15:1-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 5:20; 9:10-14, 34; 12:1-14, 22-24, 38-40; 15:1-14; 16:1-12; 19:3; 21:45; 22:15, 34; 23:1-7, 13-31; 27:62-64; Mark 2:23-25; 3:1-6; 7:1-13; 8:11-12; 12:13-17; Luke 5:17-21, 29-32; 6:6-11; 7:28-30, 36-49; 11:37-54; 12:1-3; 13:31; 14:1-6; 15:1-2; 16:13-15; 17:20-21; 18:9-14; 19:38-40; John 1:24-25; 3:1; 7:31-32, 45-52; 8:3-10, 13; 9:13-34, 40; 11:46-57; 12:17-19, 42; 18:3; Acts 5:27-40; 15:5; 23:6-10; 26:4-5; Phil 3:5-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Pharisees<\/h3>\n<p>The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the <em>hasidim<\/em> (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obedient Jews. They taught strict adherence to the law, not only the written law of Moses (<em>torah<\/em>), but also the oral traditions which they claimed Moses had passed down to them. Their goal was to defend the written law against any possible infringement. They were God-fearing and law-abiding people. They were known for passing their interpretations from generation to generation by word of mouth, establishing an oral tradition concerning legal matters. They made the law applicable by extracting from it specific guidelines for many possible situations. They argued that if the law were obeyed by all, the nation would be purged of sin and God would establish his Kingdom over all the nations. This gave their concern for obedience a goal in the future. The traditions of the Pharisees developed into the rabbinic writings known as the <em>Mishnah<\/em> and the <em>Talmud<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>Although the Pharisees were small in number, their influence on Israel was widespread (see Matt 15:12-14; see also Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.8.14; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.5). The primary influence of the Pharisees was in the local synagogue communities, while the Sadducees were more influential in the worship at the Temple in Jerusalem and in the Sanhedrin, the Jewish high council.<\/p>\n<p>Unlike the Sadducees, the Pharisees had a strong belief in the resurrection of the dead (see Acts 23:6-8). After the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Pharisees provided leadership and direction for the people of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus often came into conflict with the Pharisees, accusing them of hypocrisy and of elevating human rules over God’s righteous standards. Jesus opposed the Pharisees because they were leading people away from God’s plan for redemption. They were the theological shepherds of Israel, but Jesus castigated them as hypocrites for their perversions of doctrine and practice (see Matt 23). And the Pharisees were antagonistic toward Jesus, rejecting both him and his work, largely because of his shocking disregard of their traditions (see e.g., Matt 15:1-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 5:20; 9:10-14, 34; 12:1-14, 22-24, 38-40; 15:1-14; 16:1-12; 19:3; 21:45; 22:15, 34; 23:1-7, 13-31; 27:62-64; Mark 2:23-25; 3:1-6; 7:1-13; 8:11-12; 12:13-17; Luke 5:17-21, 29-32; 6:6-11; 7:28-30, 36-49; 11:37-54; 12:1-3; 13:31; 14:1-6; 15:1-2; 16:13-15; 17:20-21; 18:9-14; 19:38-40; John 1:24-25; 3:1; 7:31-32, 45-52; 8:3-10, 13; 9:13-34, 40; 11:46-57; 12:17-19, 42; 18:3; Acts 5:27-40; 15:5; 23:6-10; 26:4-5; Phil 3:5-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Pharisees The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the hasidim (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century BC. The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obed...","summary_en":"The Pharisees The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the hasidim (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century BC. The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obed...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69695,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Pharisees","title_en":"The Pharisees","content_ro":"<h3>The Pharisees<\/h3>\n<p>The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the <em>hasidim<\/em> (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obedient Jews. They taught strict adherence to the law, not only the written law of Moses (<em>torah<\/em>), but also the oral traditions which they claimed Moses had passed down to them. Their goal was to defend the written law against any possible infringement. They were God-fearing and law-abiding people. They were known for passing their interpretations from generation to generation by word of mouth, establishing an oral tradition concerning legal matters. They made the law applicable by extracting from it specific guidelines for many possible situations. They argued that if the law were obeyed by all, the nation would be purged of sin and God would establish his Kingdom over all the nations. This gave their concern for obedience a goal in the future. The traditions of the Pharisees developed into the rabbinic writings known as the <em>Mishnah<\/em> and the <em>Talmud<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>Although the Pharisees were small in number, their influence on Israel was widespread (see Matt 15:12-14; see also Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.8.14; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.5). The primary influence of the Pharisees was in the local synagogue communities, while the Sadducees were more influential in the worship at the Temple in Jerusalem and in the Sanhedrin, the Jewish high council.<\/p>\n<p>Unlike the Sadducees, the Pharisees had a strong belief in the resurrection of the dead (see Acts 23:6-8). After the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Pharisees provided leadership and direction for the people of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus often came into conflict with the Pharisees, accusing them of hypocrisy and of elevating human rules over God’s righteous standards. Jesus opposed the Pharisees because they were leading people away from God’s plan for redemption. They were the theological shepherds of Israel, but Jesus castigated them as hypocrites for their perversions of doctrine and practice (see Matt 23). And the Pharisees were antagonistic toward Jesus, rejecting both him and his work, largely because of his shocking disregard of their traditions (see e.g., Matt 15:1-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 5:20; 9:10-14, 34; 12:1-14, 22-24, 38-40; 15:1-14; 16:1-12; 19:3; 21:45; 22:15, 34; 23:1-7, 13-31; 27:62-64; Mark 2:23-25; 3:1-6; 7:1-13; 8:11-12; 12:13-17; Luke 5:17-21, 29-32; 6:6-11; 7:28-30, 36-49; 11:37-54; 12:1-3; 13:31; 14:1-6; 15:1-2; 16:13-15; 17:20-21; 18:9-14; 19:38-40; John 1:24-25; 3:1; 7:31-32, 45-52; 8:3-10, 13; 9:13-34, 40; 11:46-57; 12:17-19, 42; 18:3; Acts 5:27-40; 15:5; 23:6-10; 26:4-5; Phil 3:5-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Pharisees<\/h3>\n<p>The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the <em>hasidim<\/em> (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obedient Jews. They taught strict adherence to the law, not only the written law of Moses (<em>torah<\/em>), but also the oral traditions which they claimed Moses had passed down to them. Their goal was to defend the written law against any possible infringement. They were God-fearing and law-abiding people. They were known for passing their interpretations from generation to generation by word of mouth, establishing an oral tradition concerning legal matters. They made the law applicable by extracting from it specific guidelines for many possible situations. They argued that if the law were obeyed by all, the nation would be purged of sin and God would establish his Kingdom over all the nations. This gave their concern for obedience a goal in the future. The traditions of the Pharisees developed into the rabbinic writings known as the <em>Mishnah<\/em> and the <em>Talmud<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>Although the Pharisees were small in number, their influence on Israel was widespread (see Matt 15:12-14; see also Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.8.14; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.5). The primary influence of the Pharisees was in the local synagogue communities, while the Sadducees were more influential in the worship at the Temple in Jerusalem and in the Sanhedrin, the Jewish high council.<\/p>\n<p>Unlike the Sadducees, the Pharisees had a strong belief in the resurrection of the dead (see Acts 23:6-8). After the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Pharisees provided leadership and direction for the people of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus often came into conflict with the Pharisees, accusing them of hypocrisy and of elevating human rules over God’s righteous standards. Jesus opposed the Pharisees because they were leading people away from God’s plan for redemption. They were the theological shepherds of Israel, but Jesus castigated them as hypocrites for their perversions of doctrine and practice (see Matt 23). And the Pharisees were antagonistic toward Jesus, rejecting both him and his work, largely because of his shocking disregard of their traditions (see e.g., Matt 15:1-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 5:20; 9:10-14, 34; 12:1-14, 22-24, 38-40; 15:1-14; 16:1-12; 19:3; 21:45; 22:15, 34; 23:1-7, 13-31; 27:62-64; Mark 2:23-25; 3:1-6; 7:1-13; 8:11-12; 12:13-17; Luke 5:17-21, 29-32; 6:6-11; 7:28-30, 36-49; 11:37-54; 12:1-3; 13:31; 14:1-6; 15:1-2; 16:13-15; 17:20-21; 18:9-14; 19:38-40; John 1:24-25; 3:1; 7:31-32, 45-52; 8:3-10, 13; 9:13-34, 40; 11:46-57; 12:17-19, 42; 18:3; Acts 5:27-40; 15:5; 23:6-10; 26:4-5; Phil 3:5-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Pharisees The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the hasidim (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century BC. The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obed...","summary_en":"The Pharisees The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the hasidim (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century BC. The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obed...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97321,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Pharisees","title_en":"The Pharisees","content_ro":"<h3>The Pharisees<\/h3>\n<p>The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the <em>hasidim<\/em> (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obedient Jews. They taught strict adherence to the law, not only the written law of Moses (<em>torah<\/em>), but also the oral traditions which they claimed Moses had passed down to them. Their goal was to defend the written law against any possible infringement. They were God-fearing and law-abiding people. They were known for passing their interpretations from generation to generation by word of mouth, establishing an oral tradition concerning legal matters. They made the law applicable by extracting from it specific guidelines for many possible situations. They argued that if the law were obeyed by all, the nation would be purged of sin and God would establish his Kingdom over all the nations. This gave their concern for obedience a goal in the future. The traditions of the Pharisees developed into the rabbinic writings known as the <em>Mishnah<\/em> and the <em>Talmud<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>Although the Pharisees were small in number, their influence on Israel was widespread (see Matt 15:12-14; see also Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.8.14; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.5). The primary influence of the Pharisees was in the local synagogue communities, while the Sadducees were more influential in the worship at the Temple in Jerusalem and in the Sanhedrin, the Jewish high council.<\/p>\n<p>Unlike the Sadducees, the Pharisees had a strong belief in the resurrection of the dead (see Acts 23:6-8). After the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Pharisees provided leadership and direction for the people of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus often came into conflict with the Pharisees, accusing them of hypocrisy and of elevating human rules over God’s righteous standards. Jesus opposed the Pharisees because they were leading people away from God’s plan for redemption. They were the theological shepherds of Israel, but Jesus castigated them as hypocrites for their perversions of doctrine and practice (see Matt 23). And the Pharisees were antagonistic toward Jesus, rejecting both him and his work, largely because of his shocking disregard of their traditions (see e.g., Matt 15:1-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 5:20; 9:10-14, 34; 12:1-14, 22-24, 38-40; 15:1-14; 16:1-12; 19:3; 21:45; 22:15, 34; 23:1-7, 13-31; 27:62-64; Mark 2:23-25; 3:1-6; 7:1-13; 8:11-12; 12:13-17; Luke 5:17-21, 29-32; 6:6-11; 7:28-30, 36-49; 11:37-54; 12:1-3; 13:31; 14:1-6; 15:1-2; 16:13-15; 17:20-21; 18:9-14; 19:38-40; John 1:24-25; 3:1; 7:31-32, 45-52; 8:3-10, 13; 9:13-34, 40; 11:46-57; 12:17-19, 42; 18:3; Acts 5:27-40; 15:5; 23:6-10; 26:4-5; Phil 3:5-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Pharisees<\/h3>\n<p>The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the <em>hasidim<\/em> (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obedient Jews. They taught strict adherence to the law, not only the written law of Moses (<em>torah<\/em>), but also the oral traditions which they claimed Moses had passed down to them. Their goal was to defend the written law against any possible infringement. They were God-fearing and law-abiding people. They were known for passing their interpretations from generation to generation by word of mouth, establishing an oral tradition concerning legal matters. They made the law applicable by extracting from it specific guidelines for many possible situations. They argued that if the law were obeyed by all, the nation would be purged of sin and God would establish his Kingdom over all the nations. This gave their concern for obedience a goal in the future. The traditions of the Pharisees developed into the rabbinic writings known as the <em>Mishnah<\/em> and the <em>Talmud<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>Although the Pharisees were small in number, their influence on Israel was widespread (see Matt 15:12-14; see also Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.8.14; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.5). The primary influence of the Pharisees was in the local synagogue communities, while the Sadducees were more influential in the worship at the Temple in Jerusalem and in the Sanhedrin, the Jewish high council.<\/p>\n<p>Unlike the Sadducees, the Pharisees had a strong belief in the resurrection of the dead (see Acts 23:6-8). After the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Pharisees provided leadership and direction for the people of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus often came into conflict with the Pharisees, accusing them of hypocrisy and of elevating human rules over God’s righteous standards. Jesus opposed the Pharisees because they were leading people away from God’s plan for redemption. They were the theological shepherds of Israel, but Jesus castigated them as hypocrites for their perversions of doctrine and practice (see Matt 23). And the Pharisees were antagonistic toward Jesus, rejecting both him and his work, largely because of his shocking disregard of their traditions (see e.g., Matt 15:1-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 5:20; 9:10-14, 34; 12:1-14, 22-24, 38-40; 15:1-14; 16:1-12; 19:3; 21:45; 22:15, 34; 23:1-7, 13-31; 27:62-64; Mark 2:23-25; 3:1-6; 7:1-13; 8:11-12; 12:13-17; Luke 5:17-21, 29-32; 6:6-11; 7:28-30, 36-49; 11:37-54; 12:1-3; 13:31; 14:1-6; 15:1-2; 16:13-15; 17:20-21; 18:9-14; 19:38-40; John 1:24-25; 3:1; 7:31-32, 45-52; 8:3-10, 13; 9:13-34, 40; 11:46-57; 12:17-19, 42; 18:3; Acts 5:27-40; 15:5; 23:6-10; 26:4-5; Phil 3:5-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Pharisees The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the hasidim (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century BC. The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obed...","summary_en":"The Pharisees The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the hasidim (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century BC. The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obed...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":124947,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Pharisees","title_en":"The Pharisees","content_ro":"<h3>The Pharisees<\/h3>\n<p>The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the <em>hasidim<\/em> (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obedient Jews. They taught strict adherence to the law, not only the written law of Moses (<em>torah<\/em>), but also the oral traditions which they claimed Moses had passed down to them. Their goal was to defend the written law against any possible infringement. They were God-fearing and law-abiding people. They were known for passing their interpretations from generation to generation by word of mouth, establishing an oral tradition concerning legal matters. They made the law applicable by extracting from it specific guidelines for many possible situations. They argued that if the law were obeyed by all, the nation would be purged of sin and God would establish his Kingdom over all the nations. This gave their concern for obedience a goal in the future. The traditions of the Pharisees developed into the rabbinic writings known as the <em>Mishnah<\/em> and the <em>Talmud<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>Although the Pharisees were small in number, their influence on Israel was widespread (see Matt 15:12-14; see also Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.8.14; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.5). The primary influence of the Pharisees was in the local synagogue communities, while the Sadducees were more influential in the worship at the Temple in Jerusalem and in the Sanhedrin, the Jewish high council.<\/p>\n<p>Unlike the Sadducees, the Pharisees had a strong belief in the resurrection of the dead (see Acts 23:6-8). After the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Pharisees provided leadership and direction for the people of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus often came into conflict with the Pharisees, accusing them of hypocrisy and of elevating human rules over God’s righteous standards. Jesus opposed the Pharisees because they were leading people away from God’s plan for redemption. They were the theological shepherds of Israel, but Jesus castigated them as hypocrites for their perversions of doctrine and practice (see Matt 23). And the Pharisees were antagonistic toward Jesus, rejecting both him and his work, largely because of his shocking disregard of their traditions (see e.g., Matt 15:1-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 5:20; 9:10-14, 34; 12:1-14, 22-24, 38-40; 15:1-14; 16:1-12; 19:3; 21:45; 22:15, 34; 23:1-7, 13-31; 27:62-64; Mark 2:23-25; 3:1-6; 7:1-13; 8:11-12; 12:13-17; Luke 5:17-21, 29-32; 6:6-11; 7:28-30, 36-49; 11:37-54; 12:1-3; 13:31; 14:1-6; 15:1-2; 16:13-15; 17:20-21; 18:9-14; 19:38-40; John 1:24-25; 3:1; 7:31-32, 45-52; 8:3-10, 13; 9:13-34, 40; 11:46-57; 12:17-19, 42; 18:3; Acts 5:27-40; 15:5; 23:6-10; 26:4-5; Phil 3:5-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Pharisees<\/h3>\n<p>The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the <em>hasidim<\/em> (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obedient Jews. They taught strict adherence to the law, not only the written law of Moses (<em>torah<\/em>), but also the oral traditions which they claimed Moses had passed down to them. Their goal was to defend the written law against any possible infringement. They were God-fearing and law-abiding people. They were known for passing their interpretations from generation to generation by word of mouth, establishing an oral tradition concerning legal matters. They made the law applicable by extracting from it specific guidelines for many possible situations. They argued that if the law were obeyed by all, the nation would be purged of sin and God would establish his Kingdom over all the nations. This gave their concern for obedience a goal in the future. The traditions of the Pharisees developed into the rabbinic writings known as the <em>Mishnah<\/em> and the <em>Talmud<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>Although the Pharisees were small in number, their influence on Israel was widespread (see Matt 15:12-14; see also Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.8.14; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.5). The primary influence of the Pharisees was in the local synagogue communities, while the Sadducees were more influential in the worship at the Temple in Jerusalem and in the Sanhedrin, the Jewish high council.<\/p>\n<p>Unlike the Sadducees, the Pharisees had a strong belief in the resurrection of the dead (see Acts 23:6-8). After the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Pharisees provided leadership and direction for the people of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus often came into conflict with the Pharisees, accusing them of hypocrisy and of elevating human rules over God’s righteous standards. Jesus opposed the Pharisees because they were leading people away from God’s plan for redemption. They were the theological shepherds of Israel, but Jesus castigated them as hypocrites for their perversions of doctrine and practice (see Matt 23). And the Pharisees were antagonistic toward Jesus, rejecting both him and his work, largely because of his shocking disregard of their traditions (see e.g., Matt 15:1-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 5:20; 9:10-14, 34; 12:1-14, 22-24, 38-40; 15:1-14; 16:1-12; 19:3; 21:45; 22:15, 34; 23:1-7, 13-31; 27:62-64; Mark 2:23-25; 3:1-6; 7:1-13; 8:11-12; 12:13-17; Luke 5:17-21, 29-32; 6:6-11; 7:28-30, 36-49; 11:37-54; 12:1-3; 13:31; 14:1-6; 15:1-2; 16:13-15; 17:20-21; 18:9-14; 19:38-40; John 1:24-25; 3:1; 7:31-32, 45-52; 8:3-10, 13; 9:13-34, 40; 11:46-57; 12:17-19, 42; 18:3; Acts 5:27-40; 15:5; 23:6-10; 26:4-5; Phil 3:5-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Pharisees The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the hasidim (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century BC. The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obed...","summary_en":"The Pharisees The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the hasidim (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century BC. The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obed...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56325,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:24","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:24","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:24<\/strong> The <em>Pharisees<\/em> were deeply devoted to the Scriptures and earnestly desired a righteous life. They also believed in the coming Messiah, which explains their inquiries here. Some Pharisees became believers in Jesus (Acts 15:5), including the apostle Paul (Acts 26:5; Phil 3:5).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:24<\/strong> The <em>Pharisees<\/em> were deeply devoted to the Scriptures and earnestly desired a righteous life. They also believed in the coming Messiah, which explains their inquiries here. Some Pharisees became believers in Jesus (Acts 15:5), including the apostle Paul (Acts 26:5; Phil 3:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:24 The Pharisees were deeply devoted to the Scriptures and earnestly desired a righteous life. They also believed in the coming Messiah, which explains their inquiries here. Some Pharisees became believers in Jesus (Acts 15:5), including the apostle Paul (Acts 26:5; Phil 3:5).","summary_en":"1:24 The Pharisees were deeply devoted to the Scriptures and earnestly desired a righteous life. They also believed in the coming Messiah, which explains their inquiries here. Some Pharisees became believers in Jesus (Acts 15:5), including the apostle Paul (Acts 26:5; Phil 3:5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83951,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:24","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:24","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:24<\/strong> The <em>Pharisees<\/em> were deeply devoted to the Scriptures and earnestly desired a righteous life. They also believed in the coming Messiah, which explains their inquiries here. Some Pharisees became believers in Jesus (Acts 15:5), including the apostle Paul (Acts 26:5; Phil 3:5).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:24<\/strong> The <em>Pharisees<\/em> were deeply devoted to the Scriptures and earnestly desired a righteous life. They also believed in the coming Messiah, which explains their inquiries here. Some Pharisees became believers in Jesus (Acts 15:5), including the apostle Paul (Acts 26:5; Phil 3:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:24 The Pharisees were deeply devoted to the Scriptures and earnestly desired a righteous life. They also believed in the coming Messiah, which explains their inquiries here. Some Pharisees became believers in Jesus (Acts 15:5), including the apostle Paul (Acts 26:5; Phil 3:5).","summary_en":"1:24 The Pharisees were deeply devoted to the Scriptures and earnestly desired a righteous life. They also believed in the coming Messiah, which explains their inquiries here. Some Pharisees became believers in Jesus (Acts 15:5), including the apostle Paul (Acts 26:5; Phil 3:5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111577,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:24","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:24","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:24<\/strong> The <em>Pharisees<\/em> were deeply devoted to the Scriptures and earnestly desired a righteous life. They also believed in the coming Messiah, which explains their inquiries here. Some Pharisees became believers in Jesus (Acts 15:5), including the apostle Paul (Acts 26:5; Phil 3:5).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:24<\/strong> The <em>Pharisees<\/em> were deeply devoted to the Scriptures and earnestly desired a righteous life. They also believed in the coming Messiah, which explains their inquiries here. Some Pharisees became believers in Jesus (Acts 15:5), including the apostle Paul (Acts 26:5; Phil 3:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:24 The Pharisees were deeply devoted to the Scriptures and earnestly desired a righteous life. They also believed in the coming Messiah, which explains their inquiries here. Some Pharisees became believers in Jesus (Acts 15:5), including the apostle Paul (Acts 26:5; Phil 3:5).","summary_en":"1:24 The Pharisees were deeply devoted to the Scriptures and earnestly desired a righteous life. They also believed in the coming Messiah, which explains their inquiries here. Some Pharisees became believers in Jesus (Acts 15:5), including the apostle Paul (Acts 26:5; Phil 3:5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139203,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:24","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:24","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:24<\/strong> The <em>Pharisees<\/em> were deeply devoted to the Scriptures and earnestly desired a righteous life. They also believed in the coming Messiah, which explains their inquiries here. Some Pharisees became believers in Jesus (Acts 15:5), including the apostle Paul (Acts 26:5; Phil 3:5).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:24<\/strong> The <em>Pharisees<\/em> were deeply devoted to the Scriptures and earnestly desired a righteous life. They also believed in the coming Messiah, which explains their inquiries here. Some Pharisees became believers in Jesus (Acts 15:5), including the apostle Paul (Acts 26:5; Phil 3:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:24 The Pharisees were deeply devoted to the Scriptures and earnestly desired a righteous life. They also believed in the coming Messiah, which explains their inquiries here. Some Pharisees became believers in Jesus (Acts 15:5), including the apostle Paul (Acts 26:5; Phil 3:5).","summary_en":"1:24 The Pharisees were deeply devoted to the Scriptures and earnestly desired a righteous life. They also believed in the coming Messiah, which explains their inquiries here. Some Pharisees became believers in Jesus (Acts 15:5), including the apostle Paul (Acts 26:5; Phil 3:5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"25":[{"id":56326,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:25","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:25","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:25-26<\/strong> Jewish baptisms were ritual washings for becoming ceremonially pure following contact with impurity (Lev 8:6; Num 19:7). • John’s announcement of the Messiah’s arrival required that participants confess their sins and be baptized (Matt 3:6). Baptism later became the symbol of membership in Jesus’ kingdom (Acts 2:38; see also John 4:1-2).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:25-26<\/strong> Jewish baptisms were ritual washings for becoming ceremonially pure following contact with impurity (Lev 8:6; Num 19:7). • John’s announcement of the Messiah’s arrival required that participants confess their sins and be baptized (Matt 3:6). Baptism later became the symbol of membership in Jesus’ kingdom (Acts 2:38; see also John 4:1-2).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:25-26 Jewish baptisms were ritual washings for becoming ceremonially pure following contact with impurity (Lev 8:6; Num 19:7). • John’s announcement of the Messiah’s arrival required that participants confess their sins and be baptized (Matt 3:6). Baptism later became the symbol of membership in Jesus’ kingdom (Acts 2:38; see also John 4:1-2).","summary_en":"1:25-26 Jewish baptisms were ritual washings for becoming ceremonially pure following contact with impurity (Lev 8:6; Num 19:7). • John’s announcement of the Messiah’s arrival required that participants confess their sins and be baptized (Matt 3:6). Baptism later became the symbol of membership in Jesus’ kingdom (Acts 2:38; see also John 4:1-2).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83952,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:25","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:25","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:25-26<\/strong> Jewish baptisms were ritual washings for becoming ceremonially pure following contact with impurity (Lev 8:6; Num 19:7). • John’s announcement of the Messiah’s arrival required that participants confess their sins and be baptized (Matt 3:6). Baptism later became the symbol of membership in Jesus’ kingdom (Acts 2:38; see also John 4:1-2).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:25-26<\/strong> Jewish baptisms were ritual washings for becoming ceremonially pure following contact with impurity (Lev 8:6; Num 19:7). • John’s announcement of the Messiah’s arrival required that participants confess their sins and be baptized (Matt 3:6). Baptism later became the symbol of membership in Jesus’ kingdom (Acts 2:38; see also John 4:1-2).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:25-26 Jewish baptisms were ritual washings for becoming ceremonially pure following contact with impurity (Lev 8:6; Num 19:7). • John’s announcement of the Messiah’s arrival required that participants confess their sins and be baptized (Matt 3:6). Baptism later became the symbol of membership in Jesus’ kingdom (Acts 2:38; see also John 4:1-2).","summary_en":"1:25-26 Jewish baptisms were ritual washings for becoming ceremonially pure following contact with impurity (Lev 8:6; Num 19:7). • John’s announcement of the Messiah’s arrival required that participants confess their sins and be baptized (Matt 3:6). Baptism later became the symbol of membership in Jesus’ kingdom (Acts 2:38; see also John 4:1-2).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111578,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:25","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:25","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:25-26<\/strong> Jewish baptisms were ritual washings for becoming ceremonially pure following contact with impurity (Lev 8:6; Num 19:7). • John’s announcement of the Messiah’s arrival required that participants confess their sins and be baptized (Matt 3:6). Baptism later became the symbol of membership in Jesus’ kingdom (Acts 2:38; see also John 4:1-2).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:25-26<\/strong> Jewish baptisms were ritual washings for becoming ceremonially pure following contact with impurity (Lev 8:6; Num 19:7). • John’s announcement of the Messiah’s arrival required that participants confess their sins and be baptized (Matt 3:6). Baptism later became the symbol of membership in Jesus’ kingdom (Acts 2:38; see also John 4:1-2).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:25-26 Jewish baptisms were ritual washings for becoming ceremonially pure following contact with impurity (Lev 8:6; Num 19:7). • John’s announcement of the Messiah’s arrival required that participants confess their sins and be baptized (Matt 3:6). Baptism later became the symbol of membership in Jesus’ kingdom (Acts 2:38; see also John 4:1-2).","summary_en":"1:25-26 Jewish baptisms were ritual washings for becoming ceremonially pure following contact with impurity (Lev 8:6; Num 19:7). • John’s announcement of the Messiah’s arrival required that participants confess their sins and be baptized (Matt 3:6). Baptism later became the symbol of membership in Jesus’ kingdom (Acts 2:38; see also John 4:1-2).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139204,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:25","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:25","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:25-26<\/strong> Jewish baptisms were ritual washings for becoming ceremonially pure following contact with impurity (Lev 8:6; Num 19:7). • John’s announcement of the Messiah’s arrival required that participants confess their sins and be baptized (Matt 3:6). Baptism later became the symbol of membership in Jesus’ kingdom (Acts 2:38; see also John 4:1-2).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:25-26<\/strong> Jewish baptisms were ritual washings for becoming ceremonially pure following contact with impurity (Lev 8:6; Num 19:7). • John’s announcement of the Messiah’s arrival required that participants confess their sins and be baptized (Matt 3:6). Baptism later became the symbol of membership in Jesus’ kingdom (Acts 2:38; see also John 4:1-2).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:25-26 Jewish baptisms were ritual washings for becoming ceremonially pure following contact with impurity (Lev 8:6; Num 19:7). • John’s announcement of the Messiah’s arrival required that participants confess their sins and be baptized (Matt 3:6). Baptism later became the symbol of membership in Jesus’ kingdom (Acts 2:38; see also John 4:1-2).","summary_en":"1:25-26 Jewish baptisms were ritual washings for becoming ceremonially pure following contact with impurity (Lev 8:6; Num 19:7). • John’s announcement of the Messiah’s arrival required that participants confess their sins and be baptized (Matt 3:6). Baptism later became the symbol of membership in Jesus’ kingdom (Acts 2:38; see also John 4:1-2).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66230,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Baptism","title_en":"Baptism","content_ro":"<h3>Baptism<\/h3>\n<p>Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a ritual bath to wash away the impurities of their Gentile background. This ritual cleansing was often done in special baths created for purification, called mikvahs. Mikvahs were located at many synagogues, and the Temple in Jerusalem had a large number of mikvahs, which suggests that those who approached for worship would ritually bathe.<\/p>\n<p>John preached “that people should be baptized to show that they had repented of their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Luke 3:3). John’s baptism was an aspect of his role in preparing people’s hearts to receive the Messiah (Luke 3:4-6), and those who had received his baptism and repented of their sins were those who were prepared for Jesus’ message (Luke 7:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>After his resurrection, Jesus commanded his disciples to baptize new converts (Matt 28:19). Christian baptism is understood as dying and rising with Christ, signifying the death of the old life and the beginning of the new (Rom 6:1-4; Col 2:12) and also signifying a Christian’s spiritual union with Christ (Gal 3:27) and with his church. Baptism thus became the rite of initiation in the Christian community. For this reason, many interpreters see baptism as the Christian equivalent of circumcision, the rite that initiated membership into the nation of Israel under the old covenant (see Col 2:11-12). Whatever the connection with OT circumcision, baptism signifies a changed heart and a clean conscience that come from God’s forgiveness (1 Pet 3:21; cp. Deut 10:16; 30:6; Jer 4:4; Rom 2:28-29; Phil 3:3).<\/p>\n<p>As a ritual cleansing, Christian baptism signifies both forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38; 10:43; 13:38; 26:17-18) and the reception of the Holy Spirit (2:38; 9:17-18; 10:47-48; 11:15-17; 19:5-7; Luke 3:16). Many interpreters see baptism as the outward confirmation of the inward “seal” of the Spirit, whose presence is a “guarantee” of the eternal inheritance that awaits God’s faithful people (2 Cor 1:21-22; Eph 1:13-14; 4:30; Titus 3:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:6-16; 21:25; 28:19; Mark 1:4-9; 10:38-39; 11:30; 16:16; Luke 3:3-22; 7:29-30; 12:50; 20:4; John 1:25-36; 3:22-23, 26; 4:1-2; 10:40; Acts 1:5, 22; 2:38, 41; 8:12-13, 16-17, 36-38; 9:18; 10:37, 47-48; 11:16; 13:24; 16:15, 33; 18:8, 25; 19:1-7; 22:16; Rom 6:3-4; 1 Cor 1:13-17; 10:2; 12:13; 15:29; Gal 3:27; Eph 4:5; Col 2:12; Heb 6:2; 1 Pet 3:21; 1 Jn 5:6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Baptism<\/h3>\n<p>Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a ritual bath to wash away the impurities of their Gentile background. This ritual cleansing was often done in special baths created for purification, called mikvahs. Mikvahs were located at many synagogues, and the Temple in Jerusalem had a large number of mikvahs, which suggests that those who approached for worship would ritually bathe.<\/p>\n<p>John preached “that people should be baptized to show that they had repented of their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Luke 3:3). John’s baptism was an aspect of his role in preparing people’s hearts to receive the Messiah (Luke 3:4-6), and those who had received his baptism and repented of their sins were those who were prepared for Jesus’ message (Luke 7:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>After his resurrection, Jesus commanded his disciples to baptize new converts (Matt 28:19). Christian baptism is understood as dying and rising with Christ, signifying the death of the old life and the beginning of the new (Rom 6:1-4; Col 2:12) and also signifying a Christian’s spiritual union with Christ (Gal 3:27) and with his church. Baptism thus became the rite of initiation in the Christian community. For this reason, many interpreters see baptism as the Christian equivalent of circumcision, the rite that initiated membership into the nation of Israel under the old covenant (see Col 2:11-12). Whatever the connection with OT circumcision, baptism signifies a changed heart and a clean conscience that come from God’s forgiveness (1 Pet 3:21; cp. Deut 10:16; 30:6; Jer 4:4; Rom 2:28-29; Phil 3:3).<\/p>\n<p>As a ritual cleansing, Christian baptism signifies both forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38; 10:43; 13:38; 26:17-18) and the reception of the Holy Spirit (2:38; 9:17-18; 10:47-48; 11:15-17; 19:5-7; Luke 3:16). Many interpreters see baptism as the outward confirmation of the inward “seal” of the Spirit, whose presence is a “guarantee” of the eternal inheritance that awaits God’s faithful people (2 Cor 1:21-22; Eph 1:13-14; 4:30; Titus 3:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:6-16; 21:25; 28:19; Mark 1:4-9; 10:38-39; 11:30; 16:16; Luke 3:3-22; 7:29-30; 12:50; 20:4; John 1:25-36; 3:22-23, 26; 4:1-2; 10:40; Acts 1:5, 22; 2:38, 41; 8:12-13, 16-17, 36-38; 9:18; 10:37, 47-48; 11:16; 13:24; 16:15, 33; 18:8, 25; 19:1-7; 22:16; Rom 6:3-4; 1 Cor 1:13-17; 10:2; 12:13; 15:29; Gal 3:27; Eph 4:5; Col 2:12; Heb 6:2; 1 Pet 3:21; 1 Jn 5:6<\/p>","summary_ro":"Baptism Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a...","summary_en":"Baptism Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93856,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Baptism","title_en":"Baptism","content_ro":"<h3>Baptism<\/h3>\n<p>Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a ritual bath to wash away the impurities of their Gentile background. This ritual cleansing was often done in special baths created for purification, called mikvahs. Mikvahs were located at many synagogues, and the Temple in Jerusalem had a large number of mikvahs, which suggests that those who approached for worship would ritually bathe.<\/p>\n<p>John preached “that people should be baptized to show that they had repented of their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Luke 3:3). John’s baptism was an aspect of his role in preparing people’s hearts to receive the Messiah (Luke 3:4-6), and those who had received his baptism and repented of their sins were those who were prepared for Jesus’ message (Luke 7:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>After his resurrection, Jesus commanded his disciples to baptize new converts (Matt 28:19). Christian baptism is understood as dying and rising with Christ, signifying the death of the old life and the beginning of the new (Rom 6:1-4; Col 2:12) and also signifying a Christian’s spiritual union with Christ (Gal 3:27) and with his church. Baptism thus became the rite of initiation in the Christian community. For this reason, many interpreters see baptism as the Christian equivalent of circumcision, the rite that initiated membership into the nation of Israel under the old covenant (see Col 2:11-12). Whatever the connection with OT circumcision, baptism signifies a changed heart and a clean conscience that come from God’s forgiveness (1 Pet 3:21; cp. Deut 10:16; 30:6; Jer 4:4; Rom 2:28-29; Phil 3:3).<\/p>\n<p>As a ritual cleansing, Christian baptism signifies both forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38; 10:43; 13:38; 26:17-18) and the reception of the Holy Spirit (2:38; 9:17-18; 10:47-48; 11:15-17; 19:5-7; Luke 3:16). Many interpreters see baptism as the outward confirmation of the inward “seal” of the Spirit, whose presence is a “guarantee” of the eternal inheritance that awaits God’s faithful people (2 Cor 1:21-22; Eph 1:13-14; 4:30; Titus 3:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:6-16; 21:25; 28:19; Mark 1:4-9; 10:38-39; 11:30; 16:16; Luke 3:3-22; 7:29-30; 12:50; 20:4; John 1:25-36; 3:22-23, 26; 4:1-2; 10:40; Acts 1:5, 22; 2:38, 41; 8:12-13, 16-17, 36-38; 9:18; 10:37, 47-48; 11:16; 13:24; 16:15, 33; 18:8, 25; 19:1-7; 22:16; Rom 6:3-4; 1 Cor 1:13-17; 10:2; 12:13; 15:29; Gal 3:27; Eph 4:5; Col 2:12; Heb 6:2; 1 Pet 3:21; 1 Jn 5:6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Baptism<\/h3>\n<p>Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a ritual bath to wash away the impurities of their Gentile background. This ritual cleansing was often done in special baths created for purification, called mikvahs. Mikvahs were located at many synagogues, and the Temple in Jerusalem had a large number of mikvahs, which suggests that those who approached for worship would ritually bathe.<\/p>\n<p>John preached “that people should be baptized to show that they had repented of their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Luke 3:3). John’s baptism was an aspect of his role in preparing people’s hearts to receive the Messiah (Luke 3:4-6), and those who had received his baptism and repented of their sins were those who were prepared for Jesus’ message (Luke 7:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>After his resurrection, Jesus commanded his disciples to baptize new converts (Matt 28:19). Christian baptism is understood as dying and rising with Christ, signifying the death of the old life and the beginning of the new (Rom 6:1-4; Col 2:12) and also signifying a Christian’s spiritual union with Christ (Gal 3:27) and with his church. Baptism thus became the rite of initiation in the Christian community. For this reason, many interpreters see baptism as the Christian equivalent of circumcision, the rite that initiated membership into the nation of Israel under the old covenant (see Col 2:11-12). Whatever the connection with OT circumcision, baptism signifies a changed heart and a clean conscience that come from God’s forgiveness (1 Pet 3:21; cp. Deut 10:16; 30:6; Jer 4:4; Rom 2:28-29; Phil 3:3).<\/p>\n<p>As a ritual cleansing, Christian baptism signifies both forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38; 10:43; 13:38; 26:17-18) and the reception of the Holy Spirit (2:38; 9:17-18; 10:47-48; 11:15-17; 19:5-7; Luke 3:16). Many interpreters see baptism as the outward confirmation of the inward “seal” of the Spirit, whose presence is a “guarantee” of the eternal inheritance that awaits God’s faithful people (2 Cor 1:21-22; Eph 1:13-14; 4:30; Titus 3:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:6-16; 21:25; 28:19; Mark 1:4-9; 10:38-39; 11:30; 16:16; Luke 3:3-22; 7:29-30; 12:50; 20:4; John 1:25-36; 3:22-23, 26; 4:1-2; 10:40; Acts 1:5, 22; 2:38, 41; 8:12-13, 16-17, 36-38; 9:18; 10:37, 47-48; 11:16; 13:24; 16:15, 33; 18:8, 25; 19:1-7; 22:16; Rom 6:3-4; 1 Cor 1:13-17; 10:2; 12:13; 15:29; Gal 3:27; Eph 4:5; Col 2:12; Heb 6:2; 1 Pet 3:21; 1 Jn 5:6<\/p>","summary_ro":"Baptism Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a...","summary_en":"Baptism Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121482,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Baptism","title_en":"Baptism","content_ro":"<h3>Baptism<\/h3>\n<p>Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a ritual bath to wash away the impurities of their Gentile background. This ritual cleansing was often done in special baths created for purification, called mikvahs. Mikvahs were located at many synagogues, and the Temple in Jerusalem had a large number of mikvahs, which suggests that those who approached for worship would ritually bathe.<\/p>\n<p>John preached “that people should be baptized to show that they had repented of their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Luke 3:3). John’s baptism was an aspect of his role in preparing people’s hearts to receive the Messiah (Luke 3:4-6), and those who had received his baptism and repented of their sins were those who were prepared for Jesus’ message (Luke 7:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>After his resurrection, Jesus commanded his disciples to baptize new converts (Matt 28:19). Christian baptism is understood as dying and rising with Christ, signifying the death of the old life and the beginning of the new (Rom 6:1-4; Col 2:12) and also signifying a Christian’s spiritual union with Christ (Gal 3:27) and with his church. Baptism thus became the rite of initiation in the Christian community. For this reason, many interpreters see baptism as the Christian equivalent of circumcision, the rite that initiated membership into the nation of Israel under the old covenant (see Col 2:11-12). Whatever the connection with OT circumcision, baptism signifies a changed heart and a clean conscience that come from God’s forgiveness (1 Pet 3:21; cp. Deut 10:16; 30:6; Jer 4:4; Rom 2:28-29; Phil 3:3).<\/p>\n<p>As a ritual cleansing, Christian baptism signifies both forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38; 10:43; 13:38; 26:17-18) and the reception of the Holy Spirit (2:38; 9:17-18; 10:47-48; 11:15-17; 19:5-7; Luke 3:16). Many interpreters see baptism as the outward confirmation of the inward “seal” of the Spirit, whose presence is a “guarantee” of the eternal inheritance that awaits God’s faithful people (2 Cor 1:21-22; Eph 1:13-14; 4:30; Titus 3:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:6-16; 21:25; 28:19; Mark 1:4-9; 10:38-39; 11:30; 16:16; Luke 3:3-22; 7:29-30; 12:50; 20:4; John 1:25-36; 3:22-23, 26; 4:1-2; 10:40; Acts 1:5, 22; 2:38, 41; 8:12-13, 16-17, 36-38; 9:18; 10:37, 47-48; 11:16; 13:24; 16:15, 33; 18:8, 25; 19:1-7; 22:16; Rom 6:3-4; 1 Cor 1:13-17; 10:2; 12:13; 15:29; Gal 3:27; Eph 4:5; Col 2:12; Heb 6:2; 1 Pet 3:21; 1 Jn 5:6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Baptism<\/h3>\n<p>Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a ritual bath to wash away the impurities of their Gentile background. This ritual cleansing was often done in special baths created for purification, called mikvahs. Mikvahs were located at many synagogues, and the Temple in Jerusalem had a large number of mikvahs, which suggests that those who approached for worship would ritually bathe.<\/p>\n<p>John preached “that people should be baptized to show that they had repented of their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Luke 3:3). John’s baptism was an aspect of his role in preparing people’s hearts to receive the Messiah (Luke 3:4-6), and those who had received his baptism and repented of their sins were those who were prepared for Jesus’ message (Luke 7:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>After his resurrection, Jesus commanded his disciples to baptize new converts (Matt 28:19). Christian baptism is understood as dying and rising with Christ, signifying the death of the old life and the beginning of the new (Rom 6:1-4; Col 2:12) and also signifying a Christian’s spiritual union with Christ (Gal 3:27) and with his church. Baptism thus became the rite of initiation in the Christian community. For this reason, many interpreters see baptism as the Christian equivalent of circumcision, the rite that initiated membership into the nation of Israel under the old covenant (see Col 2:11-12). Whatever the connection with OT circumcision, baptism signifies a changed heart and a clean conscience that come from God’s forgiveness (1 Pet 3:21; cp. Deut 10:16; 30:6; Jer 4:4; Rom 2:28-29; Phil 3:3).<\/p>\n<p>As a ritual cleansing, Christian baptism signifies both forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38; 10:43; 13:38; 26:17-18) and the reception of the Holy Spirit (2:38; 9:17-18; 10:47-48; 11:15-17; 19:5-7; Luke 3:16). Many interpreters see baptism as the outward confirmation of the inward “seal” of the Spirit, whose presence is a “guarantee” of the eternal inheritance that awaits God’s faithful people (2 Cor 1:21-22; Eph 1:13-14; 4:30; Titus 3:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:6-16; 21:25; 28:19; Mark 1:4-9; 10:38-39; 11:30; 16:16; Luke 3:3-22; 7:29-30; 12:50; 20:4; John 1:25-36; 3:22-23, 26; 4:1-2; 10:40; Acts 1:5, 22; 2:38, 41; 8:12-13, 16-17, 36-38; 9:18; 10:37, 47-48; 11:16; 13:24; 16:15, 33; 18:8, 25; 19:1-7; 22:16; Rom 6:3-4; 1 Cor 1:13-17; 10:2; 12:13; 15:29; Gal 3:27; Eph 4:5; Col 2:12; Heb 6:2; 1 Pet 3:21; 1 Jn 5:6<\/p>","summary_ro":"Baptism Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a...","summary_en":"Baptism Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":149108,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Baptism","title_en":"Baptism","content_ro":"<h3>Baptism<\/h3>\n<p>Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a ritual bath to wash away the impurities of their Gentile background. This ritual cleansing was often done in special baths created for purification, called mikvahs. Mikvahs were located at many synagogues, and the Temple in Jerusalem had a large number of mikvahs, which suggests that those who approached for worship would ritually bathe.<\/p>\n<p>John preached “that people should be baptized to show that they had repented of their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Luke 3:3). John’s baptism was an aspect of his role in preparing people’s hearts to receive the Messiah (Luke 3:4-6), and those who had received his baptism and repented of their sins were those who were prepared for Jesus’ message (Luke 7:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>After his resurrection, Jesus commanded his disciples to baptize new converts (Matt 28:19). Christian baptism is understood as dying and rising with Christ, signifying the death of the old life and the beginning of the new (Rom 6:1-4; Col 2:12) and also signifying a Christian’s spiritual union with Christ (Gal 3:27) and with his church. Baptism thus became the rite of initiation in the Christian community. For this reason, many interpreters see baptism as the Christian equivalent of circumcision, the rite that initiated membership into the nation of Israel under the old covenant (see Col 2:11-12). Whatever the connection with OT circumcision, baptism signifies a changed heart and a clean conscience that come from God’s forgiveness (1 Pet 3:21; cp. Deut 10:16; 30:6; Jer 4:4; Rom 2:28-29; Phil 3:3).<\/p>\n<p>As a ritual cleansing, Christian baptism signifies both forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38; 10:43; 13:38; 26:17-18) and the reception of the Holy Spirit (2:38; 9:17-18; 10:47-48; 11:15-17; 19:5-7; Luke 3:16). Many interpreters see baptism as the outward confirmation of the inward “seal” of the Spirit, whose presence is a “guarantee” of the eternal inheritance that awaits God’s faithful people (2 Cor 1:21-22; Eph 1:13-14; 4:30; Titus 3:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:6-16; 21:25; 28:19; Mark 1:4-9; 10:38-39; 11:30; 16:16; Luke 3:3-22; 7:29-30; 12:50; 20:4; John 1:25-36; 3:22-23, 26; 4:1-2; 10:40; Acts 1:5, 22; 2:38, 41; 8:12-13, 16-17, 36-38; 9:18; 10:37, 47-48; 11:16; 13:24; 16:15, 33; 18:8, 25; 19:1-7; 22:16; Rom 6:3-4; 1 Cor 1:13-17; 10:2; 12:13; 15:29; Gal 3:27; Eph 4:5; Col 2:12; Heb 6:2; 1 Pet 3:21; 1 Jn 5:6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Baptism<\/h3>\n<p>Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a ritual bath to wash away the impurities of their Gentile background. This ritual cleansing was often done in special baths created for purification, called mikvahs. Mikvahs were located at many synagogues, and the Temple in Jerusalem had a large number of mikvahs, which suggests that those who approached for worship would ritually bathe.<\/p>\n<p>John preached “that people should be baptized to show that they had repented of their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Luke 3:3). John’s baptism was an aspect of his role in preparing people’s hearts to receive the Messiah (Luke 3:4-6), and those who had received his baptism and repented of their sins were those who were prepared for Jesus’ message (Luke 7:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>After his resurrection, Jesus commanded his disciples to baptize new converts (Matt 28:19). Christian baptism is understood as dying and rising with Christ, signifying the death of the old life and the beginning of the new (Rom 6:1-4; Col 2:12) and also signifying a Christian’s spiritual union with Christ (Gal 3:27) and with his church. Baptism thus became the rite of initiation in the Christian community. For this reason, many interpreters see baptism as the Christian equivalent of circumcision, the rite that initiated membership into the nation of Israel under the old covenant (see Col 2:11-12). Whatever the connection with OT circumcision, baptism signifies a changed heart and a clean conscience that come from God’s forgiveness (1 Pet 3:21; cp. Deut 10:16; 30:6; Jer 4:4; Rom 2:28-29; Phil 3:3).<\/p>\n<p>As a ritual cleansing, Christian baptism signifies both forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38; 10:43; 13:38; 26:17-18) and the reception of the Holy Spirit (2:38; 9:17-18; 10:47-48; 11:15-17; 19:5-7; Luke 3:16). Many interpreters see baptism as the outward confirmation of the inward “seal” of the Spirit, whose presence is a “guarantee” of the eternal inheritance that awaits God’s faithful people (2 Cor 1:21-22; Eph 1:13-14; 4:30; Titus 3:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:6-16; 21:25; 28:19; Mark 1:4-9; 10:38-39; 11:30; 16:16; Luke 3:3-22; 7:29-30; 12:50; 20:4; John 1:25-36; 3:22-23, 26; 4:1-2; 10:40; Acts 1:5, 22; 2:38, 41; 8:12-13, 16-17, 36-38; 9:18; 10:37, 47-48; 11:16; 13:24; 16:15, 33; 18:8, 25; 19:1-7; 22:16; Rom 6:3-4; 1 Cor 1:13-17; 10:2; 12:13; 15:29; Gal 3:27; Eph 4:5; Col 2:12; Heb 6:2; 1 Pet 3:21; 1 Jn 5:6<\/p>","summary_ro":"Baptism Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a...","summary_en":"Baptism Baptism was an important element of the Christian faith from the very beginning (Acts 2:38). The words “baptism” and “baptize” were already used in Judaism to refer to a religious rite for cleansing. The law of Moses established the use of water to cleanse people from ceremonial defilement (Num 19:14-19). Later, Gentile converts to Judaism from pagan religions were admitted to Judaism only after fulfilling certain obligations, which included the study of the Torah, circumcision, and a...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"26":[{"id":20377,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>JOHN THE BAPTIST<\/h3>\n<p>Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29, while Jesus was still ministering.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>• Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>• John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>• Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>• The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BirthInfancyandBoyhood\">Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s Gospel is our only source of information concerning the birth and boyhood of John. The Gospel writer states that John was born in the hill country of Judah (Lk 1:39) of priestly descent, being the son of Zechariah, a priest of the order of Abijah, and Elizabeth, a descendant of Aaron (v 5). Both parents were righteous in the sight of God, following all the commandments closely (v 6). Like the birth of Jesus, only to a much lesser degree, the birth of John the Baptist is described in Luke as extraordinary. The angel Gabriel announced the coming birth to Zechariah in the temple; to the older, barren Elizabeth it came as an answer to prayer (vv 8-13). John’s name is announced to Zechariah by the angel, even as his purpose as forerunner is revealed before birth (vv 13-17). Such a consecration from birth is reminiscent of the call of the OT prophet Jeremiah (cf. Jer 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>There existed some familial relationship between the families of John and Jesus. Elizabeth is described as a relative of Mary (Lk 1:36), which may connote cousin or aunt, or may only mean being from the same tribe.<\/p>\n<p>John’s childhood, as that of Jesus, is left quite vague in the Gospel account. All that is said is that “John grew up and became strong in spirit. Then he lived out in the wilderness until he began his public ministry to Israel” (Lk 1:80, <span>nlt<\/span>). Some scholars have suggested that John might have been adopted as a boy by the Essenes (as was their practice) at Qumran and reared in their wilderness community, adjacent to the Dead Sea and near the Jordan River. There are some similarities between the activities of the Qumran sect, known through the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the later ministry of John the Baptist. Both practiced a type of asceticism and removed themselves from the life of Jerusalem. Both practiced baptism and associated this rite with initiation and repentance. Finally, John and the Qumran group were both eschatologically minded, awaiting God’s final end-time activity in history. Nevertheless, many significant differences exist between John and the Qumran sect.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AppearanceandIdentity\">Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>Mark’s Gospel begins with an account of John the Baptist’s appearance: “John the Baptist . . . lived in the wilderness and was preaching that people should be baptized to show that they had turned from their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Mk 1:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). A rich OT background lies behind John’s association with the wilderness, in this case the wilderness of Judea. It was in the wilderness that God revealed himself to Moses (Ex 3), gave the law, and entered into the covenant with Israel (ch 19). It was also the site of refuge for David (1 Sm 23–26; Ps 63) and Elijah (1 Kgs 19), and in this light became the anticipated site of God’s future deliverance (Is 40:3-5; Ez 47:1-12; Hos 2:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The unusual dress of John the Baptist—“clothing made of camel’s hair, with a leather belt around his waist” (Mk 1:6, <span>niv<\/span>)—may have suggested to his audience an association with Elijah in particular (2 Kgs 1:8) or with the prophets in general (Zec 13:4). His diet, “locusts and wild honey” (Mk 1:6), was Levitically clean, reflecting one who lived off the desert (such food was also eaten at Qumran) and formed part of the broader asceticism practiced by John and his disciples (Mt 9:14; 11:18).<\/p>\n<p>Who did John understand himself to be? In answer to questions by the multitude whether he was the Messiah, Elijah, or the expected prophet (Jn 1:20-23), John only identified himself as “a voice crying in the wilderness, ‘Prepare the way of the Lord’ ” (Is 40:3). The background for the question lies at the end of the OT period. Prophecy, on the one hand, was considered to have ceased (Zec 13:2-6); yet, on the other hand, it was expected to appear again before the coming of the messianic kingdom (see Jl 2:28-29; Mal 3:1-4). Some anticipated this final prophet to be one who was like Moses (Dt 18:15), others a returning Elijah as foretold in Malachi 4:5-6. While John personally refrained from identifying himself with these specific expectations (Jn 1:20-23), it is clear that his dress, lifestyle, and message caused the people to identify him with this end-time prophet (Mt 14:5; Mk 11:32). Jesus also saw John as this final “Elijah-like” prophet (Mt 11:7-15), who from Malachi’s prophecy was to be a forerunner to the coming of the Lord (Mal 3:1-4; 4:5-6).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsProclamation\">John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>John’s proclamation involved three elements: a warning of imminent judgment at the hands of the Coming One, a call for repentance in light of the coming kingdom of heaven, and a demand to express this repentance in concrete ethical terms. Many Jews looked forward confidently to the messianic judgment as a time of blessing for themselves and destruction for the gentile oppressors. John, however, warned that Jewish ancestry was false security in the coming judgment (Lk 3:8); true repentance was the only means of escaping destruction (Mt 3:2). John anticipated this judgment at the hands of the Coming One, who would baptize the nation with “the Holy Spirit and with fire” (Lk 3:16). Fire represented the OT means of destruction in the end time (Mal 4:1) as well as purification (Mal 3:1-4), while the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the end time connoted blessing (Is 32:15; Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28) and purification (Is 4:2-4). The judgment anticipated by John was therefore twofold: destruction for the unrepentant, and blessing for the penitent and righteous (Mt 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>In light of this imminent event John called for repentance on the part of his listeners (Mt 3:2), a true “turning back” or “turning toward” God in obedience that would bring forgiveness of sin. Such a turnabout in an individual’s relation with God should be lived out in one’s everyday dealings: fairness on the part of tax collectors (Lk 3:12-13) and soldiers (v 14), and the general requirement of compassion for the poor (vv 10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsBaptism\">John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels record that John baptized those repentant of their sins at several locations: the Jordan River (Mk 1:5), Bethany beyond the Jordan (Jn 1:28), and Aenon near Salim (Jn 3:23). This practice was an integral part of John’s call for repentance, given in light of the approaching judgment and the appearance of the Coming One. The baptism of the penitent symbolized desire for forgiveness of sin, a renunciation of past life, and a desire to be included in the coming messianic kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>What was the background for John’s practice of baptism? From the OT we know of ceremonial lustrations or washings that guaranteed ritual purity (Lv 14–15; Nm 19). Unlike John’s baptism, these washings were repetitive in nature and referred predominantly to ritual rather than moral cleansing. The prophets, however, urged a moral purification associated with the washing of water (Is 1:16-18; Jer 4:14). More significantly, the prophets anticipated a cleansing by God in the end times preceding the Day of Judgment (Ez 36:25; Zec 13:1; cf. Is 44:3), an eschatological element that John may have assumed was being fulfilled in his water baptism.<\/p>\n<p>Another precedent for John’s practice may have been proselyte baptism, a rite (along with circumcision and the offering of sacrifices) that constituted the conversion of a Gentile to Judaism. Common to both proselyte baptism and John’s baptism were the emphasis on an ethical break with the past, a once-for-all character, and the similarity of immersion. Notable differences were that John’s baptism was for Jews, not Gentile converts, and that it had a marked eschatological character as a preparation for the new age. Unless John, in light of the imminence of the messianic age, consciously treated all Jews as “pagan” in need of a baptism of repentance (cf. Mt 3:7-10), it is doubtful that proselyte baptism formed the primary background for John’s baptismal ministry.<\/p>\n<p>If John’s baptism had a clear association with the forgiveness of sin, the question naturally arises as to why Jesus, the Son of God, sought baptism from John. John himself asks this very question of Jesus (Mt 3:14), to which Jesus responds, “It must be done, because we must do everything that is right” (v 15, <span>nlt<\/span>). First, it is clear that Jesus’ baptism represented an act of obedience on his part to God’s will as he saw it. Second, by submitting to the baptism of John, Jesus was clearly validating the ministry and message of John. The imminent coming of the kingdom and its Messiah, and the need for repentance in anticipation of this event that John proclaimed, were affirmed by Jesus through baptism. Third, by being baptized, Jesus condemned the self-righteous for their lack of repentance and took a stand with the penitent publicans and sinners awaiting the kingdom of God (Lk 7:29-30). Fourth, Jesus stepped forward for baptism not as an individual in need of forgiveness but as one who represented the people of God. His baptism, therefore, demonstrated solidarity with the people in their need of deliverance, even as he is judged in their place on the cross. Finally, the voice from heaven (Mk 1:11) and the descent of the Spirit (Lk 3:21-22) signify the inauguration of Jesus’ own ministry through his baptism by John.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsViewofJesus\">John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>Throughout his ministry John pointed beyond himself to one “who is far greater than I am—so much greater that I am not even worthy to be his slave” (Mk 1:7, <span>nlt<\/span>). His self-understanding apparently sprang from the application of Isaiah 40:3 to himself, that he was the preparer or forerunner for God’s coming activity through the Messiah (Lk 3:4-6). When asked by curious spectators, John firmly denied that he was the Messiah, and according to the Gospel accounts, subordinated himself to the Coming One (Mk 1:7-8; Jn 1:26-28; 3:28-31). The coming of Jesus to baptism seems to represent the first time John identified these expectations with Jesus himself (Jn 1:35-36). His recognition of Jesus as the Messiah prior to baptism (Mt 3:14) was confirmed by the descent of the Holy Spirit as a dove and the voice from heaven quoting a phrase from an OT messianic psalm (Mk 1:11a, from Ps 2:7), together with a phrase from a Suffering Servant song of Isaiah (Mk 1:11b, from Is 42:1). In the fourth Gospel, John the Baptist goes even further in acknowledging Jesus to be the “Lamb of God” (Jn 1:29), in anticipation of Jesus’ sacrificial role on the cross. And John recognized him as “God’s Chosen One” (v 34, <span>neb<\/span>—another term for the Messiah; Ps 2:7, see Mk 1:11).<\/p>\n<p>In light of John’s strong affirmation, it is at first difficult to understand his questioning of Jesus while imprisoned: “Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?” (Mt 11:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). Some have suggested that John was merely asking for the sake of his disciples, or that the question reflected John’s despondency with being imprisoned. It is more likely, however, that the question represents John’s own confusion with the activity expected of the Messiah. John had proclaimed a Coming One who would bring a baptism of fire and judgment upon the wicked (Lk 3:16). It may have been difficult for him to understand Jesus’ different emphases on forgiveness and acceptance of sinners (Mt 9:9-13) and his healing of the sick (Mt 8–9). When John’s disciples brought their master’s question to Jesus, asking whether or not he was the Messiah, Jesus responded by quoting Isaiah 35:5-6 (see also Is 61:1). This text proclaims the activities of healing and proclaiming salvation to the poor to be fulfillments of the Messiah’s role, even though they may not have been what John or countless other Jews expected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusViewofJohn\">Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>That Jesus highly regarded John the Baptist is indicated by his baptism by John. It is also explicitly stated on several occasions. Jesus called him the greatest man to have ever lived (Lk 7:28). (Of course, he was not as great as Jesus, the God-man.) Jesus also said that John was a burning and shining lamp (Jn 5:33-35) and that he practiced a baptism divinely ordained (Lk 20:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>John’s uniqueness, however, lies in the fact that he stood at the turning of the ages. He was the last of the old era, the period of the law and the prophets (Lk 16:16), which was to precede the coming of the messianic age (the kingdom of God). John was the last of the prophets, the greatest of them, the Elijah figure who would prepare the way for the judgment of God (Mt 11:13-15; Lk 1:17). Because John belonged to the era of the law and the prophets, however, he was not as great as the “least” already in the kingdom of God (Mt 11:11)—that is, those who belonged to the era of the kingdom’s appearance in Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ArrestImprisonmentandMartyrdom\">Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>To understand why John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas, one has to grasp the messianic excitement caused by John’s appearance and message (Lk 3:15-18). Herod and other secular rulers were obviously suspicious of anyone who might stir up the crowds with predictions of a coming messianic ruler. Other messianic movements had arisen before John, which resulted in outbreaks of violence against the Roman-Herodian rulership. Moreover, Herod Antipas was under heavy criticism for his marriage with Herodias, the ex-wife of his brother Philip. His first marriage, with the daughter of Aretus II, constituted a political alliance between the Herodian family and the Nabatean kingdom of Perea. His new relationship with Herodias was perceived as a breach of the political alliance and led to friction between the two families. John’s denunciation of Herod’s new marriage (Mt 14:3-12) could thus have been interpreted by Herod as a subversive rousing of sentiment against his authority. The Jewish historian Josephus states that Herod did, in fact, arrest John because he feared John’s influence over the crowds. According to Josephus, John was imprisoned at the fortress Machaerus on the eastern side of the Dead Sea. That he was not killed immediately was due to Herod’s personal fear of the righteous John (Mk 6:2) and of the people’s reaction (Mt 14:5). On a point about which Josephus is silent, the Gospels record that it was Herodias’s feelings against John (Mk 6:17) and her plot, through the dancing of her daughter, which brought about the beheading of John (vv 21-29). John was beheaded at Herodias’s request in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29 or 30.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheDisciplesofJohn\">The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p>While it is clear that a band of disciples formed around John in his lifetime (Jn 1:35), to suggest that he intended to begin a continuing movement is contradicted by his message on the imminent Day of Judgment. Apparently, John’s disciples consisted of a small group of those who had been baptized by him and were awaiting the coming Messiah. Some transferred their loyalty to Jesus after John had identified Jesus as the Coming One (Jn 1:37). Others, however, apparently stayed on with their teacher, communicating with the imprisoned John concerning the activities of Jesus (Lk 7:18-23) and, after his death, taking the body for burial (Mk 6:29).<\/p>\n<p>We know little about the activities and practices of the band of disciples clustered around John. We do know, however, that fasting was one practice specifically associated with the group, and one that marked them as similar to the Pharisees (Mt 9:14). In this practice they no doubt followed the example of John himself (Lk 7:33). Prayer and fasting were often linked in late Judaism. The disciples of John were also known for the prayers taught by their master (11:1). Seeing this practice, the disciples of Jesus asked the Lord to teach them to pray, to which Jesus responded with the Lord’s Prayer (vv 2-4).<\/p>\n<p>After his death it is likely that other disciples of John joined the followers of Jesus (see Lk 7:29-30). Not all did so, however, as disciples of John were encountered by Paul and other Christians approximately 25 years later in Ephesus (Acts 18:24–29:7). Upon hearing witness to Jesus, these followers of John proclaimed Jesus as Messiah. When Paul baptized them in the name of Jesus they received the Holy Spirit (19:4-7). Even so, it is apparent from later documents that various groups continued to honor John, even considering him the Messiah, centuries after the NT period.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOHN THE BAPTIST<\/h3>\n<p>Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29, while Jesus was still ministering.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>• Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>• John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>• Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>• The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BirthInfancyandBoyhood\">Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s Gospel is our only source of information concerning the birth and boyhood of John. The Gospel writer states that John was born in the hill country of Judah (Lk 1:39) of priestly descent, being the son of Zechariah, a priest of the order of Abijah, and Elizabeth, a descendant of Aaron (v 5). Both parents were righteous in the sight of God, following all the commandments closely (v 6). Like the birth of Jesus, only to a much lesser degree, the birth of John the Baptist is described in Luke as extraordinary. The angel Gabriel announced the coming birth to Zechariah in the temple; to the older, barren Elizabeth it came as an answer to prayer (vv 8-13). John’s name is announced to Zechariah by the angel, even as his purpose as forerunner is revealed before birth (vv 13-17). Such a consecration from birth is reminiscent of the call of the OT prophet Jeremiah (cf. Jer 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>There existed some familial relationship between the families of John and Jesus. Elizabeth is described as a relative of Mary (Lk 1:36), which may connote cousin or aunt, or may only mean being from the same tribe.<\/p>\n<p>John’s childhood, as that of Jesus, is left quite vague in the Gospel account. All that is said is that “John grew up and became strong in spirit. Then he lived out in the wilderness until he began his public ministry to Israel” (Lk 1:80, <span>nlt<\/span>). Some scholars have suggested that John might have been adopted as a boy by the Essenes (as was their practice) at Qumran and reared in their wilderness community, adjacent to the Dead Sea and near the Jordan River. There are some similarities between the activities of the Qumran sect, known through the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the later ministry of John the Baptist. Both practiced a type of asceticism and removed themselves from the life of Jerusalem. Both practiced baptism and associated this rite with initiation and repentance. Finally, John and the Qumran group were both eschatologically minded, awaiting God’s final end-time activity in history. Nevertheless, many significant differences exist between John and the Qumran sect.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AppearanceandIdentity\">Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>Mark’s Gospel begins with an account of John the Baptist’s appearance: “John the Baptist . . . lived in the wilderness and was preaching that people should be baptized to show that they had turned from their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Mk 1:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). A rich OT background lies behind John’s association with the wilderness, in this case the wilderness of Judea. It was in the wilderness that God revealed himself to Moses (Ex 3), gave the law, and entered into the covenant with Israel (ch 19). It was also the site of refuge for David (1 Sm 23–26; Ps 63) and Elijah (1 Kgs 19), and in this light became the anticipated site of God’s future deliverance (Is 40:3-5; Ez 47:1-12; Hos 2:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The unusual dress of John the Baptist—“clothing made of camel’s hair, with a leather belt around his waist” (Mk 1:6, <span>niv<\/span>)—may have suggested to his audience an association with Elijah in particular (2 Kgs 1:8) or with the prophets in general (Zec 13:4). His diet, “locusts and wild honey” (Mk 1:6), was Levitically clean, reflecting one who lived off the desert (such food was also eaten at Qumran) and formed part of the broader asceticism practiced by John and his disciples (Mt 9:14; 11:18).<\/p>\n<p>Who did John understand himself to be? In answer to questions by the multitude whether he was the Messiah, Elijah, or the expected prophet (Jn 1:20-23), John only identified himself as “a voice crying in the wilderness, ‘Prepare the way of the Lord’ ” (Is 40:3). The background for the question lies at the end of the OT period. Prophecy, on the one hand, was considered to have ceased (Zec 13:2-6); yet, on the other hand, it was expected to appear again before the coming of the messianic kingdom (see Jl 2:28-29; Mal 3:1-4). Some anticipated this final prophet to be one who was like Moses (Dt 18:15), others a returning Elijah as foretold in Malachi 4:5-6. While John personally refrained from identifying himself with these specific expectations (Jn 1:20-23), it is clear that his dress, lifestyle, and message caused the people to identify him with this end-time prophet (Mt 14:5; Mk 11:32). Jesus also saw John as this final “Elijah-like” prophet (Mt 11:7-15), who from Malachi’s prophecy was to be a forerunner to the coming of the Lord (Mal 3:1-4; 4:5-6).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsProclamation\">John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>John’s proclamation involved three elements: a warning of imminent judgment at the hands of the Coming One, a call for repentance in light of the coming kingdom of heaven, and a demand to express this repentance in concrete ethical terms. Many Jews looked forward confidently to the messianic judgment as a time of blessing for themselves and destruction for the gentile oppressors. John, however, warned that Jewish ancestry was false security in the coming judgment (Lk 3:8); true repentance was the only means of escaping destruction (Mt 3:2). John anticipated this judgment at the hands of the Coming One, who would baptize the nation with “the Holy Spirit and with fire” (Lk 3:16). Fire represented the OT means of destruction in the end time (Mal 4:1) as well as purification (Mal 3:1-4), while the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the end time connoted blessing (Is 32:15; Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28) and purification (Is 4:2-4). The judgment anticipated by John was therefore twofold: destruction for the unrepentant, and blessing for the penitent and righteous (Mt 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>In light of this imminent event John called for repentance on the part of his listeners (Mt 3:2), a true “turning back” or “turning toward” God in obedience that would bring forgiveness of sin. Such a turnabout in an individual’s relation with God should be lived out in one’s everyday dealings: fairness on the part of tax collectors (Lk 3:12-13) and soldiers (v 14), and the general requirement of compassion for the poor (vv 10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsBaptism\">John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels record that John baptized those repentant of their sins at several locations: the Jordan River (Mk 1:5), Bethany beyond the Jordan (Jn 1:28), and Aenon near Salim (Jn 3:23). This practice was an integral part of John’s call for repentance, given in light of the approaching judgment and the appearance of the Coming One. The baptism of the penitent symbolized desire for forgiveness of sin, a renunciation of past life, and a desire to be included in the coming messianic kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>What was the background for John’s practice of baptism? From the OT we know of ceremonial lustrations or washings that guaranteed ritual purity (Lv 14–15; Nm 19). Unlike John’s baptism, these washings were repetitive in nature and referred predominantly to ritual rather than moral cleansing. The prophets, however, urged a moral purification associated with the washing of water (Is 1:16-18; Jer 4:14). More significantly, the prophets anticipated a cleansing by God in the end times preceding the Day of Judgment (Ez 36:25; Zec 13:1; cf. Is 44:3), an eschatological element that John may have assumed was being fulfilled in his water baptism.<\/p>\n<p>Another precedent for John’s practice may have been proselyte baptism, a rite (along with circumcision and the offering of sacrifices) that constituted the conversion of a Gentile to Judaism. Common to both proselyte baptism and John’s baptism were the emphasis on an ethical break with the past, a once-for-all character, and the similarity of immersion. Notable differences were that John’s baptism was for Jews, not Gentile converts, and that it had a marked eschatological character as a preparation for the new age. Unless John, in light of the imminence of the messianic age, consciously treated all Jews as “pagan” in need of a baptism of repentance (cf. Mt 3:7-10), it is doubtful that proselyte baptism formed the primary background for John’s baptismal ministry.<\/p>\n<p>If John’s baptism had a clear association with the forgiveness of sin, the question naturally arises as to why Jesus, the Son of God, sought baptism from John. John himself asks this very question of Jesus (Mt 3:14), to which Jesus responds, “It must be done, because we must do everything that is right” (v 15, <span>nlt<\/span>). First, it is clear that Jesus’ baptism represented an act of obedience on his part to God’s will as he saw it. Second, by submitting to the baptism of John, Jesus was clearly validating the ministry and message of John. The imminent coming of the kingdom and its Messiah, and the need for repentance in anticipation of this event that John proclaimed, were affirmed by Jesus through baptism. Third, by being baptized, Jesus condemned the self-righteous for their lack of repentance and took a stand with the penitent publicans and sinners awaiting the kingdom of God (Lk 7:29-30). Fourth, Jesus stepped forward for baptism not as an individual in need of forgiveness but as one who represented the people of God. His baptism, therefore, demonstrated solidarity with the people in their need of deliverance, even as he is judged in their place on the cross. Finally, the voice from heaven (Mk 1:11) and the descent of the Spirit (Lk 3:21-22) signify the inauguration of Jesus’ own ministry through his baptism by John.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsViewofJesus\">John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>Throughout his ministry John pointed beyond himself to one “who is far greater than I am—so much greater that I am not even worthy to be his slave” (Mk 1:7, <span>nlt<\/span>). His self-understanding apparently sprang from the application of Isaiah 40:3 to himself, that he was the preparer or forerunner for God’s coming activity through the Messiah (Lk 3:4-6). When asked by curious spectators, John firmly denied that he was the Messiah, and according to the Gospel accounts, subordinated himself to the Coming One (Mk 1:7-8; Jn 1:26-28; 3:28-31). The coming of Jesus to baptism seems to represent the first time John identified these expectations with Jesus himself (Jn 1:35-36). His recognition of Jesus as the Messiah prior to baptism (Mt 3:14) was confirmed by the descent of the Holy Spirit as a dove and the voice from heaven quoting a phrase from an OT messianic psalm (Mk 1:11a, from Ps 2:7), together with a phrase from a Suffering Servant song of Isaiah (Mk 1:11b, from Is 42:1). In the fourth Gospel, John the Baptist goes even further in acknowledging Jesus to be the “Lamb of God” (Jn 1:29), in anticipation of Jesus’ sacrificial role on the cross. And John recognized him as “God’s Chosen One” (v 34, <span>neb<\/span>—another term for the Messiah; Ps 2:7, see Mk 1:11).<\/p>\n<p>In light of John’s strong affirmation, it is at first difficult to understand his questioning of Jesus while imprisoned: “Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?” (Mt 11:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). Some have suggested that John was merely asking for the sake of his disciples, or that the question reflected John’s despondency with being imprisoned. It is more likely, however, that the question represents John’s own confusion with the activity expected of the Messiah. John had proclaimed a Coming One who would bring a baptism of fire and judgment upon the wicked (Lk 3:16). It may have been difficult for him to understand Jesus’ different emphases on forgiveness and acceptance of sinners (Mt 9:9-13) and his healing of the sick (Mt 8–9). When John’s disciples brought their master’s question to Jesus, asking whether or not he was the Messiah, Jesus responded by quoting Isaiah 35:5-6 (see also Is 61:1). This text proclaims the activities of healing and proclaiming salvation to the poor to be fulfillments of the Messiah’s role, even though they may not have been what John or countless other Jews expected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusViewofJohn\">Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>That Jesus highly regarded John the Baptist is indicated by his baptism by John. It is also explicitly stated on several occasions. Jesus called him the greatest man to have ever lived (Lk 7:28). (Of course, he was not as great as Jesus, the God-man.) Jesus also said that John was a burning and shining lamp (Jn 5:33-35) and that he practiced a baptism divinely ordained (Lk 20:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>John’s uniqueness, however, lies in the fact that he stood at the turning of the ages. He was the last of the old era, the period of the law and the prophets (Lk 16:16), which was to precede the coming of the messianic age (the kingdom of God). John was the last of the prophets, the greatest of them, the Elijah figure who would prepare the way for the judgment of God (Mt 11:13-15; Lk 1:17). Because John belonged to the era of the law and the prophets, however, he was not as great as the “least” already in the kingdom of God (Mt 11:11)—that is, those who belonged to the era of the kingdom’s appearance in Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ArrestImprisonmentandMartyrdom\">Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>To understand why John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas, one has to grasp the messianic excitement caused by John’s appearance and message (Lk 3:15-18). Herod and other secular rulers were obviously suspicious of anyone who might stir up the crowds with predictions of a coming messianic ruler. Other messianic movements had arisen before John, which resulted in outbreaks of violence against the Roman-Herodian rulership. Moreover, Herod Antipas was under heavy criticism for his marriage with Herodias, the ex-wife of his brother Philip. His first marriage, with the daughter of Aretus II, constituted a political alliance between the Herodian family and the Nabatean kingdom of Perea. His new relationship with Herodias was perceived as a breach of the political alliance and led to friction between the two families. John’s denunciation of Herod’s new marriage (Mt 14:3-12) could thus have been interpreted by Herod as a subversive rousing of sentiment against his authority. The Jewish historian Josephus states that Herod did, in fact, arrest John because he feared John’s influence over the crowds. According to Josephus, John was imprisoned at the fortress Machaerus on the eastern side of the Dead Sea. That he was not killed immediately was due to Herod’s personal fear of the righteous John (Mk 6:2) and of the people’s reaction (Mt 14:5). On a point about which Josephus is silent, the Gospels record that it was Herodias’s feelings against John (Mk 6:17) and her plot, through the dancing of her daughter, which brought about the beheading of John (vv 21-29). John was beheaded at Herodias’s request in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29 or 30.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheDisciplesofJohn\">The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p>While it is clear that a band of disciples formed around John in his lifetime (Jn 1:35), to suggest that he intended to begin a continuing movement is contradicted by his message on the imminent Day of Judgment. Apparently, John’s disciples consisted of a small group of those who had been baptized by him and were awaiting the coming Messiah. Some transferred their loyalty to Jesus after John had identified Jesus as the Coming One (Jn 1:37). Others, however, apparently stayed on with their teacher, communicating with the imprisoned John concerning the activities of Jesus (Lk 7:18-23) and, after his death, taking the body for burial (Mk 6:29).<\/p>\n<p>We know little about the activities and practices of the band of disciples clustered around John. We do know, however, that fasting was one practice specifically associated with the group, and one that marked them as similar to the Pharisees (Mt 9:14). In this practice they no doubt followed the example of John himself (Lk 7:33). Prayer and fasting were often linked in late Judaism. The disciples of John were also known for the prayers taught by their master (11:1). Seeing this practice, the disciples of Jesus asked the Lord to teach them to pray, to which Jesus responded with the Lord’s Prayer (vv 2-4).<\/p>\n<p>After his death it is likely that other disciples of John joined the followers of Jesus (see Lk 7:29-30). Not all did so, however, as disciples of John were encountered by Paul and other Christians approximately 25 years later in Ephesus (Acts 18:24–29:7). Upon hearing witness to Jesus, these followers of John proclaimed Jesus as Messiah. When Paul baptized them in the name of Jesus they received the Holy Spirit (19:4-7). Even so, it is apparent from later documents that various groups continued to honor John, even considering him the Messiah, centuries after the NT period.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOHN THE BAPTIST Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately AD 29, while Jesus was still ministering. Preview • Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood • Appearance and Identity • John’s Proclamation • ...","summary_en":"JOHN THE BAPTIST Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately AD 29, while Jesus was still ministering. Preview • Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood • Appearance and Identity • John’s Proclamation • ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"27":[{"id":56327,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:27","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:27","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:27<\/strong> A menial task such as removing a <em>sandal<\/em> was reserved for a <em>slave<\/em><em>;<\/em> these tasks were never performed by a disciple.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:27<\/strong> A menial task such as removing a <em>sandal<\/em> was reserved for a <em>slave<\/em><em>;<\/em> these tasks were never performed by a disciple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:27 A menial task such as removing a sandal was reserved for a slave; these tasks were never performed by a disciple.","summary_en":"1:27 A menial task such as removing a sandal was reserved for a slave; these tasks were never performed by a disciple.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83953,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:27","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:27","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:27<\/strong> A menial task such as removing a <em>sandal<\/em> was reserved for a <em>slave<\/em><em>;<\/em> these tasks were never performed by a disciple.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:27<\/strong> A menial task such as removing a <em>sandal<\/em> was reserved for a <em>slave<\/em><em>;<\/em> these tasks were never performed by a disciple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:27 A menial task such as removing a sandal was reserved for a slave; these tasks were never performed by a disciple.","summary_en":"1:27 A menial task such as removing a sandal was reserved for a slave; these tasks were never performed by a disciple.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111579,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:27","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:27","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:27<\/strong> A menial task such as removing a <em>sandal<\/em> was reserved for a <em>slave<\/em><em>;<\/em> these tasks were never performed by a disciple.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:27<\/strong> A menial task such as removing a <em>sandal<\/em> was reserved for a <em>slave<\/em><em>;<\/em> these tasks were never performed by a disciple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:27 A menial task such as removing a sandal was reserved for a slave; these tasks were never performed by a disciple.","summary_en":"1:27 A menial task such as removing a sandal was reserved for a slave; these tasks were never performed by a disciple.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139205,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:27","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:27","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:27<\/strong> A menial task such as removing a <em>sandal<\/em> was reserved for a <em>slave<\/em><em>;<\/em> these tasks were never performed by a disciple.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:27<\/strong> A menial task such as removing a <em>sandal<\/em> was reserved for a <em>slave<\/em><em>;<\/em> these tasks were never performed by a disciple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:27 A menial task such as removing a sandal was reserved for a slave; these tasks were never performed by a disciple.","summary_en":"1:27 A menial task such as removing a sandal was reserved for a slave; these tasks were never performed by a disciple.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"28":[{"id":4393,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Bethabara*","title_en":"Bethabara*","content_ro":"<h3>BETHABARA*<\/h3>\n<p>Village where messengers from the Pharisees questioned John the Baptist (Jn 1:28, <span>kjv<\/span>). Modern translations have “Bethany” instead of Bethabara in accordance with superior manuscript evidence. John called it Bethany “beyond the Jordan” to distinguish it from the Bethany near Jerusalem. <em>See<\/em> Bethany #2.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BETHABARA*<\/h3>\n<p>Village where messengers from the Pharisees questioned John the Baptist (Jn 1:28, <span>kjv<\/span>). Modern translations have “Bethany” instead of Bethabara in accordance with superior manuscript evidence. John called it Bethany “beyond the Jordan” to distinguish it from the Bethany near Jerusalem. <em>See<\/em> Bethany #2.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BETHABARA* Village where messengers from the Pharisees questioned John the Baptist (Jn 1:28, kjv). Modern translations have “Bethany” instead of Bethabara in accordance with superior manuscript evidence. John called it Bethany “beyond the Jordan” to distinguish it from the Bethany near Jerusalem. See Bethany #2.","summary_en":"BETHABARA* Village where messengers from the Pharisees questioned John the Baptist (Jn 1:28, kjv). Modern translations have “Bethany” instead of Bethabara in accordance with superior manuscript evidence. John called it Bethany “beyond the Jordan” to distinguish it from the Bethany near Jerusalem. See Bethany #2.","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":4405,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Bethany","title_en":"Bethany","content_ro":"<h3>BETHANY<\/h3>\n<li>1. Village on the eastern slope of the Mt of Olives about a mile and a half (2.4 kilometers) east of Jerusalem. Jesus and his disciples sometimes stayed in Bethany when in Judea, as when they attended temple observances during Passover (Mt 21:17; Mk 11:11). Jesus was eating at the home of Simon the leper in Bethany when a woman came and anointed his head with costly perfume (Mt 26:6-13; Mk 14:3-9). Bethany was also the home of Mary and Martha and their brother Lazarus, where Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead (Jn 11:1, 18). The village was near Bethphage on an approach to Jerusalem (Mk 11:1; Lk 19:29) that Jesus followed in preparation for his triumphal entry into Jerusalem. In Bethany Jesus blessed his disciples after the resurrection and parted from them (Lk 24:50). Today the town is called el-Azariyeh (the place of Lazarus).<\/li>\n<li>2. Village on “the other side of the Jordan” (the east side), where John the Baptist baptized (Jn 1:28).<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>BETHANY<\/h3>\n<li>1. Village on the eastern slope of the Mt of Olives about a mile and a half (2.4 kilometers) east of Jerusalem. Jesus and his disciples sometimes stayed in Bethany when in Judea, as when they attended temple observances during Passover (Mt 21:17; Mk 11:11). Jesus was eating at the home of Simon the leper in Bethany when a woman came and anointed his head with costly perfume (Mt 26:6-13; Mk 14:3-9). Bethany was also the home of Mary and Martha and their brother Lazarus, where Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead (Jn 11:1, 18). The village was near Bethphage on an approach to Jerusalem (Mk 11:1; Lk 19:29) that Jesus followed in preparation for his triumphal entry into Jerusalem. In Bethany Jesus blessed his disciples after the resurrection and parted from them (Lk 24:50). Today the town is called el-Azariyeh (the place of Lazarus).<\/li>\n<li>2. Village on “the other side of the Jordan” (the east side), where John the Baptist baptized (Jn 1:28).<\/li>","summary_ro":"BETHANY 1. Village on the eastern slope of the Mt of Olives about a mile and a half (2.4 kilometers) east of Jerusalem. Jesus and his disciples sometimes stayed in Bethany when in Judea, as when they attended temple observances during Passover (Mt 21:17; Mk 11:11). Jesus was eating at the home of Simon the leper in Bethany when a woman came and anointed his head with costly perfume (Mt 26:6-13; Mk 14:3-9). Bethany was also the home of Mary and Martha and their brother Lazarus, where Jesus rai...","summary_en":"BETHANY 1. Village on the eastern slope of the Mt of Olives about a mile and a half (2.4 kilometers) east of Jerusalem. Jesus and his disciples sometimes stayed in Bethany when in Judea, as when they attended temple observances during Passover (Mt 21:17; Mk 11:11). Jesus was eating at the home of Simon the leper in Bethany when a woman came and anointed his head with costly perfume (Mt 26:6-13; Mk 14:3-9). Bethany was also the home of Mary and Martha and their brother Lazarus, where Jesus rai...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":12588,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Fords of the Jordan","title_en":"Fords of the Jordan","content_ro":"<h3>FORDS OF THE JORDAN<\/h3>\n<p>Shallow places where people and animals could wade through the Jordan River. Many OT personalities crossed over the Jordan at its two main fords: these people include Jacob (Gn 32:10), Gideon (Jgs 8:4), David (2 Sm 10:17; 17:22), Absalom (17:24), Abner and his men (2:29). Joshua led his followers across the Jordan on dry land during a flood, truly a God-given miracle (Jos 3:15-16). Jesus crossed the Jordan on several occasions on his trips between Galilee and Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>The two main fords of the Jordan were at Jericho (Jos 2:7; Jgs 3:28; 2 Sm 19:15) and at Bethabara, where John baptized (Jn 1:28, <span>kjv<\/span>). In certain places and at certain times the Jordan was not fordable: after the melting of the snows in the Lebanon Mountains, and near the Dead Sea, where the Jordan is about 100 feet (30.5 meters) wide and from 5 to 10 feet (1.5 to 3 meters) deep (Jos 3:15).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jordan River.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FORDS OF THE JORDAN<\/h3>\n<p>Shallow places where people and animals could wade through the Jordan River. Many OT personalities crossed over the Jordan at its two main fords: these people include Jacob (Gn 32:10), Gideon (Jgs 8:4), David (2 Sm 10:17; 17:22), Absalom (17:24), Abner and his men (2:29). Joshua led his followers across the Jordan on dry land during a flood, truly a God-given miracle (Jos 3:15-16). Jesus crossed the Jordan on several occasions on his trips between Galilee and Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>The two main fords of the Jordan were at Jericho (Jos 2:7; Jgs 3:28; 2 Sm 19:15) and at Bethabara, where John baptized (Jn 1:28, <span>kjv<\/span>). In certain places and at certain times the Jordan was not fordable: after the melting of the snows in the Lebanon Mountains, and near the Dead Sea, where the Jordan is about 100 feet (30.5 meters) wide and from 5 to 10 feet (1.5 to 3 meters) deep (Jos 3:15).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jordan River.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FORDS OF THE JORDAN Shallow places where people and animals could wade through the Jordan River. Many OT personalities crossed over the Jordan at its two main fords: these people include Jacob (Gn 32:10), Gideon (Jgs 8:4), David (2 Sm 10:17; 17:22), Absalom (17:24), Abner and his men (2:29). Joshua led his followers across the Jordan on dry land during a flood, truly a God-given miracle (Jos 3:15-16). Jesus crossed the Jordan on several occasions on his trips between Galilee and Jerusalem. Th...","summary_en":"FORDS OF THE JORDAN Shallow places where people and animals could wade through the Jordan River. Many OT personalities crossed over the Jordan at its two main fords: these people include Jacob (Gn 32:10), Gideon (Jgs 8:4), David (2 Sm 10:17; 17:22), Absalom (17:24), Abner and his men (2:29). Joshua led his followers across the Jordan on dry land during a flood, truly a God-given miracle (Jos 3:15-16). Jesus crossed the Jordan on several occasions on his trips between Galilee and Jerusalem. Th...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20360,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>JOHN THE BAPTIST<\/h3>\n<p>Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29, while Jesus was still ministering.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>• Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>• John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>• Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>• The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BirthInfancyandBoyhood\">Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s Gospel is our only source of information concerning the birth and boyhood of John. The Gospel writer states that John was born in the hill country of Judah (Lk 1:39) of priestly descent, being the son of Zechariah, a priest of the order of Abijah, and Elizabeth, a descendant of Aaron (v 5). Both parents were righteous in the sight of God, following all the commandments closely (v 6). Like the birth of Jesus, only to a much lesser degree, the birth of John the Baptist is described in Luke as extraordinary. The angel Gabriel announced the coming birth to Zechariah in the temple; to the older, barren Elizabeth it came as an answer to prayer (vv 8-13). John’s name is announced to Zechariah by the angel, even as his purpose as forerunner is revealed before birth (vv 13-17). Such a consecration from birth is reminiscent of the call of the OT prophet Jeremiah (cf. Jer 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>There existed some familial relationship between the families of John and Jesus. Elizabeth is described as a relative of Mary (Lk 1:36), which may connote cousin or aunt, or may only mean being from the same tribe.<\/p>\n<p>John’s childhood, as that of Jesus, is left quite vague in the Gospel account. All that is said is that “John grew up and became strong in spirit. Then he lived out in the wilderness until he began his public ministry to Israel” (Lk 1:80, <span>nlt<\/span>). Some scholars have suggested that John might have been adopted as a boy by the Essenes (as was their practice) at Qumran and reared in their wilderness community, adjacent to the Dead Sea and near the Jordan River. There are some similarities between the activities of the Qumran sect, known through the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the later ministry of John the Baptist. Both practiced a type of asceticism and removed themselves from the life of Jerusalem. Both practiced baptism and associated this rite with initiation and repentance. Finally, John and the Qumran group were both eschatologically minded, awaiting God’s final end-time activity in history. Nevertheless, many significant differences exist between John and the Qumran sect.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AppearanceandIdentity\">Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>Mark’s Gospel begins with an account of John the Baptist’s appearance: “John the Baptist . . . lived in the wilderness and was preaching that people should be baptized to show that they had turned from their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Mk 1:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). A rich OT background lies behind John’s association with the wilderness, in this case the wilderness of Judea. It was in the wilderness that God revealed himself to Moses (Ex 3), gave the law, and entered into the covenant with Israel (ch 19). It was also the site of refuge for David (1 Sm 23–26; Ps 63) and Elijah (1 Kgs 19), and in this light became the anticipated site of God’s future deliverance (Is 40:3-5; Ez 47:1-12; Hos 2:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The unusual dress of John the Baptist—“clothing made of camel’s hair, with a leather belt around his waist” (Mk 1:6, <span>niv<\/span>)—may have suggested to his audience an association with Elijah in particular (2 Kgs 1:8) or with the prophets in general (Zec 13:4). His diet, “locusts and wild honey” (Mk 1:6), was Levitically clean, reflecting one who lived off the desert (such food was also eaten at Qumran) and formed part of the broader asceticism practiced by John and his disciples (Mt 9:14; 11:18).<\/p>\n<p>Who did John understand himself to be? In answer to questions by the multitude whether he was the Messiah, Elijah, or the expected prophet (Jn 1:20-23), John only identified himself as “a voice crying in the wilderness, ‘Prepare the way of the Lord’ ” (Is 40:3). The background for the question lies at the end of the OT period. Prophecy, on the one hand, was considered to have ceased (Zec 13:2-6); yet, on the other hand, it was expected to appear again before the coming of the messianic kingdom (see Jl 2:28-29; Mal 3:1-4). Some anticipated this final prophet to be one who was like Moses (Dt 18:15), others a returning Elijah as foretold in Malachi 4:5-6. While John personally refrained from identifying himself with these specific expectations (Jn 1:20-23), it is clear that his dress, lifestyle, and message caused the people to identify him with this end-time prophet (Mt 14:5; Mk 11:32). Jesus also saw John as this final “Elijah-like” prophet (Mt 11:7-15), who from Malachi’s prophecy was to be a forerunner to the coming of the Lord (Mal 3:1-4; 4:5-6).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsProclamation\">John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>John’s proclamation involved three elements: a warning of imminent judgment at the hands of the Coming One, a call for repentance in light of the coming kingdom of heaven, and a demand to express this repentance in concrete ethical terms. Many Jews looked forward confidently to the messianic judgment as a time of blessing for themselves and destruction for the gentile oppressors. John, however, warned that Jewish ancestry was false security in the coming judgment (Lk 3:8); true repentance was the only means of escaping destruction (Mt 3:2). John anticipated this judgment at the hands of the Coming One, who would baptize the nation with “the Holy Spirit and with fire” (Lk 3:16). Fire represented the OT means of destruction in the end time (Mal 4:1) as well as purification (Mal 3:1-4), while the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the end time connoted blessing (Is 32:15; Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28) and purification (Is 4:2-4). The judgment anticipated by John was therefore twofold: destruction for the unrepentant, and blessing for the penitent and righteous (Mt 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>In light of this imminent event John called for repentance on the part of his listeners (Mt 3:2), a true “turning back” or “turning toward” God in obedience that would bring forgiveness of sin. Such a turnabout in an individual’s relation with God should be lived out in one’s everyday dealings: fairness on the part of tax collectors (Lk 3:12-13) and soldiers (v 14), and the general requirement of compassion for the poor (vv 10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsBaptism\">John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels record that John baptized those repentant of their sins at several locations: the Jordan River (Mk 1:5), Bethany beyond the Jordan (Jn 1:28), and Aenon near Salim (Jn 3:23). This practice was an integral part of John’s call for repentance, given in light of the approaching judgment and the appearance of the Coming One. The baptism of the penitent symbolized desire for forgiveness of sin, a renunciation of past life, and a desire to be included in the coming messianic kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>What was the background for John’s practice of baptism? From the OT we know of ceremonial lustrations or washings that guaranteed ritual purity (Lv 14–15; Nm 19). Unlike John’s baptism, these washings were repetitive in nature and referred predominantly to ritual rather than moral cleansing. The prophets, however, urged a moral purification associated with the washing of water (Is 1:16-18; Jer 4:14). More significantly, the prophets anticipated a cleansing by God in the end times preceding the Day of Judgment (Ez 36:25; Zec 13:1; cf. Is 44:3), an eschatological element that John may have assumed was being fulfilled in his water baptism.<\/p>\n<p>Another precedent for John’s practice may have been proselyte baptism, a rite (along with circumcision and the offering of sacrifices) that constituted the conversion of a Gentile to Judaism. Common to both proselyte baptism and John’s baptism were the emphasis on an ethical break with the past, a once-for-all character, and the similarity of immersion. Notable differences were that John’s baptism was for Jews, not Gentile converts, and that it had a marked eschatological character as a preparation for the new age. Unless John, in light of the imminence of the messianic age, consciously treated all Jews as “pagan” in need of a baptism of repentance (cf. Mt 3:7-10), it is doubtful that proselyte baptism formed the primary background for John’s baptismal ministry.<\/p>\n<p>If John’s baptism had a clear association with the forgiveness of sin, the question naturally arises as to why Jesus, the Son of God, sought baptism from John. John himself asks this very question of Jesus (Mt 3:14), to which Jesus responds, “It must be done, because we must do everything that is right” (v 15, <span>nlt<\/span>). First, it is clear that Jesus’ baptism represented an act of obedience on his part to God’s will as he saw it. Second, by submitting to the baptism of John, Jesus was clearly validating the ministry and message of John. The imminent coming of the kingdom and its Messiah, and the need for repentance in anticipation of this event that John proclaimed, were affirmed by Jesus through baptism. Third, by being baptized, Jesus condemned the self-righteous for their lack of repentance and took a stand with the penitent publicans and sinners awaiting the kingdom of God (Lk 7:29-30). Fourth, Jesus stepped forward for baptism not as an individual in need of forgiveness but as one who represented the people of God. His baptism, therefore, demonstrated solidarity with the people in their need of deliverance, even as he is judged in their place on the cross. Finally, the voice from heaven (Mk 1:11) and the descent of the Spirit (Lk 3:21-22) signify the inauguration of Jesus’ own ministry through his baptism by John.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsViewofJesus\">John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>Throughout his ministry John pointed beyond himself to one “who is far greater than I am—so much greater that I am not even worthy to be his slave” (Mk 1:7, <span>nlt<\/span>). His self-understanding apparently sprang from the application of Isaiah 40:3 to himself, that he was the preparer or forerunner for God’s coming activity through the Messiah (Lk 3:4-6). When asked by curious spectators, John firmly denied that he was the Messiah, and according to the Gospel accounts, subordinated himself to the Coming One (Mk 1:7-8; Jn 1:26-28; 3:28-31). The coming of Jesus to baptism seems to represent the first time John identified these expectations with Jesus himself (Jn 1:35-36). His recognition of Jesus as the Messiah prior to baptism (Mt 3:14) was confirmed by the descent of the Holy Spirit as a dove and the voice from heaven quoting a phrase from an OT messianic psalm (Mk 1:11a, from Ps 2:7), together with a phrase from a Suffering Servant song of Isaiah (Mk 1:11b, from Is 42:1). In the fourth Gospel, John the Baptist goes even further in acknowledging Jesus to be the “Lamb of God” (Jn 1:29), in anticipation of Jesus’ sacrificial role on the cross. And John recognized him as “God’s Chosen One” (v 34, <span>neb<\/span>—another term for the Messiah; Ps 2:7, see Mk 1:11).<\/p>\n<p>In light of John’s strong affirmation, it is at first difficult to understand his questioning of Jesus while imprisoned: “Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?” (Mt 11:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). Some have suggested that John was merely asking for the sake of his disciples, or that the question reflected John’s despondency with being imprisoned. It is more likely, however, that the question represents John’s own confusion with the activity expected of the Messiah. John had proclaimed a Coming One who would bring a baptism of fire and judgment upon the wicked (Lk 3:16). It may have been difficult for him to understand Jesus’ different emphases on forgiveness and acceptance of sinners (Mt 9:9-13) and his healing of the sick (Mt 8–9). When John’s disciples brought their master’s question to Jesus, asking whether or not he was the Messiah, Jesus responded by quoting Isaiah 35:5-6 (see also Is 61:1). This text proclaims the activities of healing and proclaiming salvation to the poor to be fulfillments of the Messiah’s role, even though they may not have been what John or countless other Jews expected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusViewofJohn\">Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>That Jesus highly regarded John the Baptist is indicated by his baptism by John. It is also explicitly stated on several occasions. Jesus called him the greatest man to have ever lived (Lk 7:28). (Of course, he was not as great as Jesus, the God-man.) Jesus also said that John was a burning and shining lamp (Jn 5:33-35) and that he practiced a baptism divinely ordained (Lk 20:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>John’s uniqueness, however, lies in the fact that he stood at the turning of the ages. He was the last of the old era, the period of the law and the prophets (Lk 16:16), which was to precede the coming of the messianic age (the kingdom of God). John was the last of the prophets, the greatest of them, the Elijah figure who would prepare the way for the judgment of God (Mt 11:13-15; Lk 1:17). Because John belonged to the era of the law and the prophets, however, he was not as great as the “least” already in the kingdom of God (Mt 11:11)—that is, those who belonged to the era of the kingdom’s appearance in Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ArrestImprisonmentandMartyrdom\">Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>To understand why John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas, one has to grasp the messianic excitement caused by John’s appearance and message (Lk 3:15-18). Herod and other secular rulers were obviously suspicious of anyone who might stir up the crowds with predictions of a coming messianic ruler. Other messianic movements had arisen before John, which resulted in outbreaks of violence against the Roman-Herodian rulership. Moreover, Herod Antipas was under heavy criticism for his marriage with Herodias, the ex-wife of his brother Philip. His first marriage, with the daughter of Aretus II, constituted a political alliance between the Herodian family and the Nabatean kingdom of Perea. His new relationship with Herodias was perceived as a breach of the political alliance and led to friction between the two families. John’s denunciation of Herod’s new marriage (Mt 14:3-12) could thus have been interpreted by Herod as a subversive rousing of sentiment against his authority. The Jewish historian Josephus states that Herod did, in fact, arrest John because he feared John’s influence over the crowds. According to Josephus, John was imprisoned at the fortress Machaerus on the eastern side of the Dead Sea. That he was not killed immediately was due to Herod’s personal fear of the righteous John (Mk 6:2) and of the people’s reaction (Mt 14:5). On a point about which Josephus is silent, the Gospels record that it was Herodias’s feelings against John (Mk 6:17) and her plot, through the dancing of her daughter, which brought about the beheading of John (vv 21-29). John was beheaded at Herodias’s request in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29 or 30.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheDisciplesofJohn\">The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p>While it is clear that a band of disciples formed around John in his lifetime (Jn 1:35), to suggest that he intended to begin a continuing movement is contradicted by his message on the imminent Day of Judgment. Apparently, John’s disciples consisted of a small group of those who had been baptized by him and were awaiting the coming Messiah. Some transferred their loyalty to Jesus after John had identified Jesus as the Coming One (Jn 1:37). Others, however, apparently stayed on with their teacher, communicating with the imprisoned John concerning the activities of Jesus (Lk 7:18-23) and, after his death, taking the body for burial (Mk 6:29).<\/p>\n<p>We know little about the activities and practices of the band of disciples clustered around John. We do know, however, that fasting was one practice specifically associated with the group, and one that marked them as similar to the Pharisees (Mt 9:14). In this practice they no doubt followed the example of John himself (Lk 7:33). Prayer and fasting were often linked in late Judaism. The disciples of John were also known for the prayers taught by their master (11:1). Seeing this practice, the disciples of Jesus asked the Lord to teach them to pray, to which Jesus responded with the Lord’s Prayer (vv 2-4).<\/p>\n<p>After his death it is likely that other disciples of John joined the followers of Jesus (see Lk 7:29-30). Not all did so, however, as disciples of John were encountered by Paul and other Christians approximately 25 years later in Ephesus (Acts 18:24–29:7). Upon hearing witness to Jesus, these followers of John proclaimed Jesus as Messiah. When Paul baptized them in the name of Jesus they received the Holy Spirit (19:4-7). Even so, it is apparent from later documents that various groups continued to honor John, even considering him the Messiah, centuries after the NT period.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOHN THE BAPTIST<\/h3>\n<p>Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29, while Jesus was still ministering.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>• Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>• John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>• Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>• The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BirthInfancyandBoyhood\">Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s Gospel is our only source of information concerning the birth and boyhood of John. The Gospel writer states that John was born in the hill country of Judah (Lk 1:39) of priestly descent, being the son of Zechariah, a priest of the order of Abijah, and Elizabeth, a descendant of Aaron (v 5). Both parents were righteous in the sight of God, following all the commandments closely (v 6). Like the birth of Jesus, only to a much lesser degree, the birth of John the Baptist is described in Luke as extraordinary. The angel Gabriel announced the coming birth to Zechariah in the temple; to the older, barren Elizabeth it came as an answer to prayer (vv 8-13). John’s name is announced to Zechariah by the angel, even as his purpose as forerunner is revealed before birth (vv 13-17). Such a consecration from birth is reminiscent of the call of the OT prophet Jeremiah (cf. Jer 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>There existed some familial relationship between the families of John and Jesus. Elizabeth is described as a relative of Mary (Lk 1:36), which may connote cousin or aunt, or may only mean being from the same tribe.<\/p>\n<p>John’s childhood, as that of Jesus, is left quite vague in the Gospel account. All that is said is that “John grew up and became strong in spirit. Then he lived out in the wilderness until he began his public ministry to Israel” (Lk 1:80, <span>nlt<\/span>). Some scholars have suggested that John might have been adopted as a boy by the Essenes (as was their practice) at Qumran and reared in their wilderness community, adjacent to the Dead Sea and near the Jordan River. There are some similarities between the activities of the Qumran sect, known through the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the later ministry of John the Baptist. Both practiced a type of asceticism and removed themselves from the life of Jerusalem. Both practiced baptism and associated this rite with initiation and repentance. Finally, John and the Qumran group were both eschatologically minded, awaiting God’s final end-time activity in history. Nevertheless, many significant differences exist between John and the Qumran sect.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AppearanceandIdentity\">Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>Mark’s Gospel begins with an account of John the Baptist’s appearance: “John the Baptist . . . lived in the wilderness and was preaching that people should be baptized to show that they had turned from their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Mk 1:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). A rich OT background lies behind John’s association with the wilderness, in this case the wilderness of Judea. It was in the wilderness that God revealed himself to Moses (Ex 3), gave the law, and entered into the covenant with Israel (ch 19). It was also the site of refuge for David (1 Sm 23–26; Ps 63) and Elijah (1 Kgs 19), and in this light became the anticipated site of God’s future deliverance (Is 40:3-5; Ez 47:1-12; Hos 2:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The unusual dress of John the Baptist—“clothing made of camel’s hair, with a leather belt around his waist” (Mk 1:6, <span>niv<\/span>)—may have suggested to his audience an association with Elijah in particular (2 Kgs 1:8) or with the prophets in general (Zec 13:4). His diet, “locusts and wild honey” (Mk 1:6), was Levitically clean, reflecting one who lived off the desert (such food was also eaten at Qumran) and formed part of the broader asceticism practiced by John and his disciples (Mt 9:14; 11:18).<\/p>\n<p>Who did John understand himself to be? In answer to questions by the multitude whether he was the Messiah, Elijah, or the expected prophet (Jn 1:20-23), John only identified himself as “a voice crying in the wilderness, ‘Prepare the way of the Lord’ ” (Is 40:3). The background for the question lies at the end of the OT period. Prophecy, on the one hand, was considered to have ceased (Zec 13:2-6); yet, on the other hand, it was expected to appear again before the coming of the messianic kingdom (see Jl 2:28-29; Mal 3:1-4). Some anticipated this final prophet to be one who was like Moses (Dt 18:15), others a returning Elijah as foretold in Malachi 4:5-6. While John personally refrained from identifying himself with these specific expectations (Jn 1:20-23), it is clear that his dress, lifestyle, and message caused the people to identify him with this end-time prophet (Mt 14:5; Mk 11:32). Jesus also saw John as this final “Elijah-like” prophet (Mt 11:7-15), who from Malachi’s prophecy was to be a forerunner to the coming of the Lord (Mal 3:1-4; 4:5-6).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsProclamation\">John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>John’s proclamation involved three elements: a warning of imminent judgment at the hands of the Coming One, a call for repentance in light of the coming kingdom of heaven, and a demand to express this repentance in concrete ethical terms. Many Jews looked forward confidently to the messianic judgment as a time of blessing for themselves and destruction for the gentile oppressors. John, however, warned that Jewish ancestry was false security in the coming judgment (Lk 3:8); true repentance was the only means of escaping destruction (Mt 3:2). John anticipated this judgment at the hands of the Coming One, who would baptize the nation with “the Holy Spirit and with fire” (Lk 3:16). Fire represented the OT means of destruction in the end time (Mal 4:1) as well as purification (Mal 3:1-4), while the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the end time connoted blessing (Is 32:15; Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28) and purification (Is 4:2-4). The judgment anticipated by John was therefore twofold: destruction for the unrepentant, and blessing for the penitent and righteous (Mt 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>In light of this imminent event John called for repentance on the part of his listeners (Mt 3:2), a true “turning back” or “turning toward” God in obedience that would bring forgiveness of sin. Such a turnabout in an individual’s relation with God should be lived out in one’s everyday dealings: fairness on the part of tax collectors (Lk 3:12-13) and soldiers (v 14), and the general requirement of compassion for the poor (vv 10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsBaptism\">John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels record that John baptized those repentant of their sins at several locations: the Jordan River (Mk 1:5), Bethany beyond the Jordan (Jn 1:28), and Aenon near Salim (Jn 3:23). This practice was an integral part of John’s call for repentance, given in light of the approaching judgment and the appearance of the Coming One. The baptism of the penitent symbolized desire for forgiveness of sin, a renunciation of past life, and a desire to be included in the coming messianic kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>What was the background for John’s practice of baptism? From the OT we know of ceremonial lustrations or washings that guaranteed ritual purity (Lv 14–15; Nm 19). Unlike John’s baptism, these washings were repetitive in nature and referred predominantly to ritual rather than moral cleansing. The prophets, however, urged a moral purification associated with the washing of water (Is 1:16-18; Jer 4:14). More significantly, the prophets anticipated a cleansing by God in the end times preceding the Day of Judgment (Ez 36:25; Zec 13:1; cf. Is 44:3), an eschatological element that John may have assumed was being fulfilled in his water baptism.<\/p>\n<p>Another precedent for John’s practice may have been proselyte baptism, a rite (along with circumcision and the offering of sacrifices) that constituted the conversion of a Gentile to Judaism. Common to both proselyte baptism and John’s baptism were the emphasis on an ethical break with the past, a once-for-all character, and the similarity of immersion. Notable differences were that John’s baptism was for Jews, not Gentile converts, and that it had a marked eschatological character as a preparation for the new age. Unless John, in light of the imminence of the messianic age, consciously treated all Jews as “pagan” in need of a baptism of repentance (cf. Mt 3:7-10), it is doubtful that proselyte baptism formed the primary background for John’s baptismal ministry.<\/p>\n<p>If John’s baptism had a clear association with the forgiveness of sin, the question naturally arises as to why Jesus, the Son of God, sought baptism from John. John himself asks this very question of Jesus (Mt 3:14), to which Jesus responds, “It must be done, because we must do everything that is right” (v 15, <span>nlt<\/span>). First, it is clear that Jesus’ baptism represented an act of obedience on his part to God’s will as he saw it. Second, by submitting to the baptism of John, Jesus was clearly validating the ministry and message of John. The imminent coming of the kingdom and its Messiah, and the need for repentance in anticipation of this event that John proclaimed, were affirmed by Jesus through baptism. Third, by being baptized, Jesus condemned the self-righteous for their lack of repentance and took a stand with the penitent publicans and sinners awaiting the kingdom of God (Lk 7:29-30). Fourth, Jesus stepped forward for baptism not as an individual in need of forgiveness but as one who represented the people of God. His baptism, therefore, demonstrated solidarity with the people in their need of deliverance, even as he is judged in their place on the cross. Finally, the voice from heaven (Mk 1:11) and the descent of the Spirit (Lk 3:21-22) signify the inauguration of Jesus’ own ministry through his baptism by John.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsViewofJesus\">John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>Throughout his ministry John pointed beyond himself to one “who is far greater than I am—so much greater that I am not even worthy to be his slave” (Mk 1:7, <span>nlt<\/span>). His self-understanding apparently sprang from the application of Isaiah 40:3 to himself, that he was the preparer or forerunner for God’s coming activity through the Messiah (Lk 3:4-6). When asked by curious spectators, John firmly denied that he was the Messiah, and according to the Gospel accounts, subordinated himself to the Coming One (Mk 1:7-8; Jn 1:26-28; 3:28-31). The coming of Jesus to baptism seems to represent the first time John identified these expectations with Jesus himself (Jn 1:35-36). His recognition of Jesus as the Messiah prior to baptism (Mt 3:14) was confirmed by the descent of the Holy Spirit as a dove and the voice from heaven quoting a phrase from an OT messianic psalm (Mk 1:11a, from Ps 2:7), together with a phrase from a Suffering Servant song of Isaiah (Mk 1:11b, from Is 42:1). In the fourth Gospel, John the Baptist goes even further in acknowledging Jesus to be the “Lamb of God” (Jn 1:29), in anticipation of Jesus’ sacrificial role on the cross. And John recognized him as “God’s Chosen One” (v 34, <span>neb<\/span>—another term for the Messiah; Ps 2:7, see Mk 1:11).<\/p>\n<p>In light of John’s strong affirmation, it is at first difficult to understand his questioning of Jesus while imprisoned: “Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?” (Mt 11:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). Some have suggested that John was merely asking for the sake of his disciples, or that the question reflected John’s despondency with being imprisoned. It is more likely, however, that the question represents John’s own confusion with the activity expected of the Messiah. John had proclaimed a Coming One who would bring a baptism of fire and judgment upon the wicked (Lk 3:16). It may have been difficult for him to understand Jesus’ different emphases on forgiveness and acceptance of sinners (Mt 9:9-13) and his healing of the sick (Mt 8–9). When John’s disciples brought their master’s question to Jesus, asking whether or not he was the Messiah, Jesus responded by quoting Isaiah 35:5-6 (see also Is 61:1). This text proclaims the activities of healing and proclaiming salvation to the poor to be fulfillments of the Messiah’s role, even though they may not have been what John or countless other Jews expected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusViewofJohn\">Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>That Jesus highly regarded John the Baptist is indicated by his baptism by John. It is also explicitly stated on several occasions. Jesus called him the greatest man to have ever lived (Lk 7:28). (Of course, he was not as great as Jesus, the God-man.) Jesus also said that John was a burning and shining lamp (Jn 5:33-35) and that he practiced a baptism divinely ordained (Lk 20:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>John’s uniqueness, however, lies in the fact that he stood at the turning of the ages. He was the last of the old era, the period of the law and the prophets (Lk 16:16), which was to precede the coming of the messianic age (the kingdom of God). John was the last of the prophets, the greatest of them, the Elijah figure who would prepare the way for the judgment of God (Mt 11:13-15; Lk 1:17). Because John belonged to the era of the law and the prophets, however, he was not as great as the “least” already in the kingdom of God (Mt 11:11)—that is, those who belonged to the era of the kingdom’s appearance in Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ArrestImprisonmentandMartyrdom\">Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>To understand why John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas, one has to grasp the messianic excitement caused by John’s appearance and message (Lk 3:15-18). Herod and other secular rulers were obviously suspicious of anyone who might stir up the crowds with predictions of a coming messianic ruler. Other messianic movements had arisen before John, which resulted in outbreaks of violence against the Roman-Herodian rulership. Moreover, Herod Antipas was under heavy criticism for his marriage with Herodias, the ex-wife of his brother Philip. His first marriage, with the daughter of Aretus II, constituted a political alliance between the Herodian family and the Nabatean kingdom of Perea. His new relationship with Herodias was perceived as a breach of the political alliance and led to friction between the two families. John’s denunciation of Herod’s new marriage (Mt 14:3-12) could thus have been interpreted by Herod as a subversive rousing of sentiment against his authority. The Jewish historian Josephus states that Herod did, in fact, arrest John because he feared John’s influence over the crowds. According to Josephus, John was imprisoned at the fortress Machaerus on the eastern side of the Dead Sea. That he was not killed immediately was due to Herod’s personal fear of the righteous John (Mk 6:2) and of the people’s reaction (Mt 14:5). On a point about which Josephus is silent, the Gospels record that it was Herodias’s feelings against John (Mk 6:17) and her plot, through the dancing of her daughter, which brought about the beheading of John (vv 21-29). John was beheaded at Herodias’s request in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29 or 30.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheDisciplesofJohn\">The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p>While it is clear that a band of disciples formed around John in his lifetime (Jn 1:35), to suggest that he intended to begin a continuing movement is contradicted by his message on the imminent Day of Judgment. Apparently, John’s disciples consisted of a small group of those who had been baptized by him and were awaiting the coming Messiah. Some transferred their loyalty to Jesus after John had identified Jesus as the Coming One (Jn 1:37). Others, however, apparently stayed on with their teacher, communicating with the imprisoned John concerning the activities of Jesus (Lk 7:18-23) and, after his death, taking the body for burial (Mk 6:29).<\/p>\n<p>We know little about the activities and practices of the band of disciples clustered around John. We do know, however, that fasting was one practice specifically associated with the group, and one that marked them as similar to the Pharisees (Mt 9:14). In this practice they no doubt followed the example of John himself (Lk 7:33). Prayer and fasting were often linked in late Judaism. The disciples of John were also known for the prayers taught by their master (11:1). Seeing this practice, the disciples of Jesus asked the Lord to teach them to pray, to which Jesus responded with the Lord’s Prayer (vv 2-4).<\/p>\n<p>After his death it is likely that other disciples of John joined the followers of Jesus (see Lk 7:29-30). Not all did so, however, as disciples of John were encountered by Paul and other Christians approximately 25 years later in Ephesus (Acts 18:24–29:7). Upon hearing witness to Jesus, these followers of John proclaimed Jesus as Messiah. When Paul baptized them in the name of Jesus they received the Holy Spirit (19:4-7). Even so, it is apparent from later documents that various groups continued to honor John, even considering him the Messiah, centuries after the NT period.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOHN THE BAPTIST Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately AD 29, while Jesus was still ministering. Preview • Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood • Appearance and Identity • John’s Proclamation • ...","summary_en":"JOHN THE BAPTIST Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately AD 29, while Jesus was still ministering. Preview • Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood • Appearance and Identity • John’s Proclamation • ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":29582,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Perea*","title_en":"Perea*","content_ro":"<h3>PEREA*<\/h3>\n<p>Term not occurring in the NT except in the fourth-century manuscript Codex Sinaiticus and the fifth-century manuscript Codex Washingtonianus, where it appears in Luke 6:17 and is treated as a variant reading by most editors of the Greek NT. It was used in the first century <span>AD<\/span> by Josephus to refer to the region “beyond the Jordan” (he derived the word Perea from the Greek for “beyond”). The geographical location of the area is therefore best understood from Josephus’s <em>War of the Jews<\/em> (3.3.3): “Now the length of Perea is from Machaerus to Pella, and its breadth from Philadelphia to Jordan; its northern parts are bounded by Pella, as we have already said, as well as its western with Jordan; the land of Moab is its southern border, and its eastern limits reach to Arabia, and Silbonitis, and besides to Philadelphene and Gerasa.” Gadara is called “the metropolis of Perea” by Josephus because it was a “place of strength” and because “many of the citizens of Gadara were rich men” (<em>War<\/em> 4.7.3). This Gadara is not to be confused with the Gadara of the Decapolis, modern Um Qeis, but is to be identified with Tell Gadura, about 15 miles (24.1 kilometers) northwest of modern Amman, Jordan.<\/p>\n<p>The Decapolis is separated from Perea in Matthew 4:25, where it is listed among the various sections of Palestine from which people came to hear Jesus. Perea is here called the region “beyond the Jordan,” and is so designated also in Mark 3:8. In one place Matthew referred to Perea as “the region of Judea beyond the Jordan” (Mt 19:1). This is perplexing because politically Perea was never a part of Judea, belonging to the jurisdiction not of Archelaus but of Herod Antipas, who also controlled Galilee. The parallel passage in Mark 10:1 reads, “the region of Judea and beyond the Jordan.” Perhaps Matthew was using the phrase to refer to that part of Perea that, though politically not a part of Judea, was Jewish in population. In his <em>Natural History<\/em> (<span>AD<\/span> 77) Pliny spoke of Perea as a place “separated from the <em>other parts<\/em> of Judea by the River Jordan” (5.70), and the <em>“rest<\/em> of Judea by the River Jordan” (5.70), and the <em>“rest<\/em> of Judea” as being divided into 10 local government areas, as though he considered Perea to be a part of Judea. However, this may be a mistaken assumption, since Pliny’s knowledge of the immediate area is somewhat questionable—in the same context he erroneously asserts that the Dead Sea is “more than 100 miles long and fully as wide at its widest part” (<em>Natural History<\/em> 5.72), whereas in reality it is less than 50 miles (80.5 kilometers) long and only 11 miles (17.7 kilometers) wide.<\/p>\n<p>The area was well known and often mentioned in the OT by the phrase “beyond the Jordan” (Nm 22:1; Dt 1:1, 5), and was occupied in its southern portion by the two Israelite tribes Gad and Reuben (Jos 1:12-14). Stretching from the brook Kerith in the north almost to the Arnon River in the south, Perea was virtually synonymous with OT Gilead (Jos 22:9; Jgs 5:17).<\/p>\n<p>It seems to have been an important district in the decades before the birth of Christ (Hellenistic period) when Jewish (Maccabean) leaders controlled it after 124 <span>BC<\/span>. Under Roman rule, it was given to Herod the Great until his death in 4 <span>BC<\/span>, when it passed (according to his will) into the hands of his son Herod Antipas, along with Galilee. Because the area was beautiful and productive and had trees noted for their medicinal balm (Jer 8:22; 46:11), it was always well populated and supported numerous well-known cities, such as Pella, Jabesh-gilead, Succoth, Penuel, and Gerasa (modern Jerash). Herod Antipas even had a fort named Machaerus in the southern extremities of Perea, where he imprisoned John the Baptist and had him put to death (see Josephus’s <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.5.2).<\/p>\n<p>It was customary for Jews traveling back and forth from Galilee to Judea to cross the Jordan into Perea in order to avoid contact with the Samaritans. Before his death, John the Baptist had been baptizing in Bethany beyond the Jordan when he announced Jesus as the Lamb of God (Jn 1:28-29), and Jesus returned here during his ministry once when he was being severely persecuted (10:40).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PEREA*<\/h3>\n<p>Term not occurring in the NT except in the fourth-century manuscript Codex Sinaiticus and the fifth-century manuscript Codex Washingtonianus, where it appears in Luke 6:17 and is treated as a variant reading by most editors of the Greek NT. It was used in the first century <span>AD<\/span> by Josephus to refer to the region “beyond the Jordan” (he derived the word Perea from the Greek for “beyond”). The geographical location of the area is therefore best understood from Josephus’s <em>War of the Jews<\/em> (3.3.3): “Now the length of Perea is from Machaerus to Pella, and its breadth from Philadelphia to Jordan; its northern parts are bounded by Pella, as we have already said, as well as its western with Jordan; the land of Moab is its southern border, and its eastern limits reach to Arabia, and Silbonitis, and besides to Philadelphene and Gerasa.” Gadara is called “the metropolis of Perea” by Josephus because it was a “place of strength” and because “many of the citizens of Gadara were rich men” (<em>War<\/em> 4.7.3). This Gadara is not to be confused with the Gadara of the Decapolis, modern Um Qeis, but is to be identified with Tell Gadura, about 15 miles (24.1 kilometers) northwest of modern Amman, Jordan.<\/p>\n<p>The Decapolis is separated from Perea in Matthew 4:25, where it is listed among the various sections of Palestine from which people came to hear Jesus. Perea is here called the region “beyond the Jordan,” and is so designated also in Mark 3:8. In one place Matthew referred to Perea as “the region of Judea beyond the Jordan” (Mt 19:1). This is perplexing because politically Perea was never a part of Judea, belonging to the jurisdiction not of Archelaus but of Herod Antipas, who also controlled Galilee. The parallel passage in Mark 10:1 reads, “the region of Judea and beyond the Jordan.” Perhaps Matthew was using the phrase to refer to that part of Perea that, though politically not a part of Judea, was Jewish in population. In his <em>Natural History<\/em> (<span>AD<\/span> 77) Pliny spoke of Perea as a place “separated from the <em>other parts<\/em> of Judea by the River Jordan” (5.70), and the <em>“rest<\/em> of Judea by the River Jordan” (5.70), and the <em>“rest<\/em> of Judea” as being divided into 10 local government areas, as though he considered Perea to be a part of Judea. However, this may be a mistaken assumption, since Pliny’s knowledge of the immediate area is somewhat questionable—in the same context he erroneously asserts that the Dead Sea is “more than 100 miles long and fully as wide at its widest part” (<em>Natural History<\/em> 5.72), whereas in reality it is less than 50 miles (80.5 kilometers) long and only 11 miles (17.7 kilometers) wide.<\/p>\n<p>The area was well known and often mentioned in the OT by the phrase “beyond the Jordan” (Nm 22:1; Dt 1:1, 5), and was occupied in its southern portion by the two Israelite tribes Gad and Reuben (Jos 1:12-14). Stretching from the brook Kerith in the north almost to the Arnon River in the south, Perea was virtually synonymous with OT Gilead (Jos 22:9; Jgs 5:17).<\/p>\n<p>It seems to have been an important district in the decades before the birth of Christ (Hellenistic period) when Jewish (Maccabean) leaders controlled it after 124 <span>BC<\/span>. Under Roman rule, it was given to Herod the Great until his death in 4 <span>BC<\/span>, when it passed (according to his will) into the hands of his son Herod Antipas, along with Galilee. Because the area was beautiful and productive and had trees noted for their medicinal balm (Jer 8:22; 46:11), it was always well populated and supported numerous well-known cities, such as Pella, Jabesh-gilead, Succoth, Penuel, and Gerasa (modern Jerash). Herod Antipas even had a fort named Machaerus in the southern extremities of Perea, where he imprisoned John the Baptist and had him put to death (see Josephus’s <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.5.2).<\/p>\n<p>It was customary for Jews traveling back and forth from Galilee to Judea to cross the Jordan into Perea in order to avoid contact with the Samaritans. Before his death, John the Baptist had been baptizing in Bethany beyond the Jordan when he announced Jesus as the Lamb of God (Jn 1:28-29), and Jesus returned here during his ministry once when he was being severely persecuted (10:40).<\/p>","summary_ro":"PEREA* Term not occurring in the NT except in the fourth-century manuscript Codex Sinaiticus and the fifth-century manuscript Codex Washingtonianus, where it appears in Luke 6:17 and is treated as a variant reading by most editors of the Greek NT. It was used in the first century AD by Josephus to refer to the region “beyond the Jordan” (he derived the word Perea from the Greek for “beyond”). The geographical location of the area is therefore best understood from Josephus’s War of the Jews (3...","summary_en":"PEREA* Term not occurring in the NT except in the fourth-century manuscript Codex Sinaiticus and the fifth-century manuscript Codex Washingtonianus, where it appears in Luke 6:17 and is treated as a variant reading by most editors of the Greek NT. It was used in the first century AD by Josephus to refer to the region “beyond the Jordan” (he derived the word Perea from the Greek for “beyond”). The geographical location of the area is therefore best understood from Josephus’s War of the Jews (3...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"29":[{"id":3759,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of Jesus*, Baptism","title_en":"of Jesus*, Baptism","content_ro":"<h3>BAPTISM OF JESUS*<\/h3>\n<p>Major event in Jesus’ life, which marked the beginning of his ministry. The fact that John the Baptist baptized Jesus is disputed by very few scholars today, but the purpose and significance of Jesus’ baptism remain controversial.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel accounts agree that John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance (Mt 3:6-10; Mk 1:4-5; Lk 3:3-14). He proclaimed that the kingdom of heaven was at hand and that God’s people should prepare for the Lord’s coming by a renewal of faith toward God. For John, that meant repentance, confession of sins, and practicing righteousness. That being so, why was Jesus baptized? If Jesus was sinless, as the NT proclaims (2 Cor 5:21; Heb 4:15; 1 Pt 2:22), why did he submit to a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins? The Gospels provide the answers.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelofMark\">The Gospel of Mark<\/p>\n<p>Mark presents the baptism of Jesus as a necessary preparation for his period of temptation and ministry. At his baptism Jesus received the Father’s approval and the bestowal of the Holy Spirit (1:9-11). Mark’s focus on Jesus’ special relation to the Father, “You are my beloved Son, and I am fully pleased with you” (1:11, <span>nlt<\/span>), brings together two important OT references. Jesus’ messiahship is presented in a radically new way, in which the ruling Messiah (Ps 2:7) is also the Suffering Servant of the Lord (Is 42:1). Popular Jewish belief expected a ruling Messiah who would establish the kingdom of God, not a Messiah who would suffer for the people. Mark intended to show that in Jesus alone had God’s appointed time for the fulfillment of his purpose come.<\/p>\n<p>The statement that the heavens opened at the baptism of Jesus (Mk 1:10) may proclaim the arrival of the “end times” (the time of fulfillment and the establishment of God’s kingdom). A then-current Jewish interpretation of Isaiah 64:1 held that in the last days God would open the heavens and come down to his people. In Jewish thought the rending of the heavens was also associated with hearing God’s voice and the bestowal of God’s Spirit.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelofMatthew\">The Gospel of Matthew<\/p>\n<p>Matthew’s account of Jesus’ baptism has more detail than Mark’s. It begins by noting John’s reluctance to baptize Jesus (3:14). John was persuaded only after Jesus explained to him that the act was “fitting for us to fulfil all righteousness” (3:15, <span>rsv<\/span>). Although the full meaning of those words is uncertain, they at least suggest that Jesus’ baptism was necessary to accomplish God’s will. In both the Old and New Testaments (Ps 98:2-3; Rom 1:17) God’s righteousness is seen in his salvation for his people. That is why the Messiah can be called “The <span>Lord<\/span> Is Our Righteousness” (Jer 23:6; cf. Is 11:1-5). Jesus told John that his baptism was necessary to do God’s will in bringing about salvation for his people. Thus the Father’s declaration at Jesus’ baptism is presented in the form of a public announcement, emphasizing that Jesus was God’s anointed Servant about to begin his ministry as the bringer of the Lord’s salvation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelofLuke\">The Gospel of Luke<\/p>\n<p>Luke passes over Jesus’ baptism quickly, placing it alongside the baptism of others who came to John (3:21-22). The context in Luke also sheds some light on the purpose of Jesus’ baptism. Luke, unlike Matthew, places the genealogy of Jesus after his baptism and just before his ministry begins. The parallel to Moses, whose genealogy occurs just before his primary work begins (Ex 6:14-25), seems more than coincidental. It is probably intended to illustrate Jesus’ role in bringing deliverance (salvation) to God’s people just as Moses did in the OT. At his baptism, by the descent of the Holy Spirit upon him, Jesus was equipped to do the mission God had called him to do. Following his temptation (Lk 4:1-13), Jesus entered the synagogue and declared to the people that he had been anointed by the Spirit to proclaim good news (4:16-21). That anointing came at Jesus’ baptism (cf. Acts 10:37-38).<\/p>\n<p>In his Gospel account, Luke tried to identify Jesus with the common people—for example, in the birth story (with Jesus born in a stable and visited by lowly shepherds, Lk 2:8-20) and through placing the genealogy (stressing Jesus’ relation to all of humanity, 3:38) right after the baptism. Thus, Luke saw the baptism as Jesus’ first step in identifying himself with those he had come to save.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the Messiah was always inseparable from the people he represented (see especially Jer 30:21 and Ez 45–46). Although the “servant” in Isaiah is sometimes viewed corporately (Is 44:1) and sometimes individually (53:3), he is always viewed as the representative <em>of the people<\/em> to the Lord (49:5-26), as well as the servant <em>of the Lord.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Evidently Luke, along with Mark and Matthew, was trying to show that Jesus, as the divine representative of the people, had identified himself with them in his baptism.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelofJohn\">The Gospel of John<\/p>\n<p>The fourth Gospel does not say that Jesus was baptized but does say that John the Baptist saw the Spirit descend upon Jesus (Jn 1:32-34). The account emphasizes that Jesus went to John during John’s preaching and baptizing ministry; John recognized that Jesus was the Christ, that God’s Spirit was upon him, and that he was the Son of God. John also recognized that Jesus, unlike himself, baptized with the Holy Spirit (1:29-36).<\/p>\n<p>John the Baptist described Jesus as the “Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (1:29, <span>nlt<\/span>). The closest OT parallel to that statement comes from a “servant of the Lord” passage (Is 53:6-7). It is possible that “Lamb of God” could be an alternate translation of the Aramaic term “servant of God.”<\/p>\n<p>The sense of Jesus as the one who bears the sins of the people is obviously in view in the fourth Gospel. That Jesus was the promised representative and deliverer of the people was understood by John the Baptist and conveyed by the Gospel writer.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>In the four Gospels it is clear that the Holy Spirit came upon Jesus at his baptism to enable him to do the work of God. All four Gospel writers saw that Jesus had been anointed by God to accomplish his mission of bringing salvation to the people. Those ideas provide a key to understanding why Jesus was baptized. On that occasion at the beginning of his ministry, God anointed Jesus with the Holy Spirit to do his mediating work between God and the people. At his baptism Jesus was identified as the one who would bear the people’s sins; Jesus was baptized to identify himself with sinful people.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BAPTISM OF JESUS*<\/h3>\n<p>Major event in Jesus’ life, which marked the beginning of his ministry. The fact that John the Baptist baptized Jesus is disputed by very few scholars today, but the purpose and significance of Jesus’ baptism remain controversial.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel accounts agree that John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance (Mt 3:6-10; Mk 1:4-5; Lk 3:3-14). He proclaimed that the kingdom of heaven was at hand and that God’s people should prepare for the Lord’s coming by a renewal of faith toward God. For John, that meant repentance, confession of sins, and practicing righteousness. That being so, why was Jesus baptized? If Jesus was sinless, as the NT proclaims (2 Cor 5:21; Heb 4:15; 1 Pt 2:22), why did he submit to a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins? The Gospels provide the answers.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelofMark\">The Gospel of Mark<\/p>\n<p>Mark presents the baptism of Jesus as a necessary preparation for his period of temptation and ministry. At his baptism Jesus received the Father’s approval and the bestowal of the Holy Spirit (1:9-11). Mark’s focus on Jesus’ special relation to the Father, “You are my beloved Son, and I am fully pleased with you” (1:11, <span>nlt<\/span>), brings together two important OT references. Jesus’ messiahship is presented in a radically new way, in which the ruling Messiah (Ps 2:7) is also the Suffering Servant of the Lord (Is 42:1). Popular Jewish belief expected a ruling Messiah who would establish the kingdom of God, not a Messiah who would suffer for the people. Mark intended to show that in Jesus alone had God’s appointed time for the fulfillment of his purpose come.<\/p>\n<p>The statement that the heavens opened at the baptism of Jesus (Mk 1:10) may proclaim the arrival of the “end times” (the time of fulfillment and the establishment of God’s kingdom). A then-current Jewish interpretation of Isaiah 64:1 held that in the last days God would open the heavens and come down to his people. In Jewish thought the rending of the heavens was also associated with hearing God’s voice and the bestowal of God’s Spirit.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelofMatthew\">The Gospel of Matthew<\/p>\n<p>Matthew’s account of Jesus’ baptism has more detail than Mark’s. It begins by noting John’s reluctance to baptize Jesus (3:14). John was persuaded only after Jesus explained to him that the act was “fitting for us to fulfil all righteousness” (3:15, <span>rsv<\/span>). Although the full meaning of those words is uncertain, they at least suggest that Jesus’ baptism was necessary to accomplish God’s will. In both the Old and New Testaments (Ps 98:2-3; Rom 1:17) God’s righteousness is seen in his salvation for his people. That is why the Messiah can be called “The <span>Lord<\/span> Is Our Righteousness” (Jer 23:6; cf. Is 11:1-5). Jesus told John that his baptism was necessary to do God’s will in bringing about salvation for his people. Thus the Father’s declaration at Jesus’ baptism is presented in the form of a public announcement, emphasizing that Jesus was God’s anointed Servant about to begin his ministry as the bringer of the Lord’s salvation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelofLuke\">The Gospel of Luke<\/p>\n<p>Luke passes over Jesus’ baptism quickly, placing it alongside the baptism of others who came to John (3:21-22). The context in Luke also sheds some light on the purpose of Jesus’ baptism. Luke, unlike Matthew, places the genealogy of Jesus after his baptism and just before his ministry begins. The parallel to Moses, whose genealogy occurs just before his primary work begins (Ex 6:14-25), seems more than coincidental. It is probably intended to illustrate Jesus’ role in bringing deliverance (salvation) to God’s people just as Moses did in the OT. At his baptism, by the descent of the Holy Spirit upon him, Jesus was equipped to do the mission God had called him to do. Following his temptation (Lk 4:1-13), Jesus entered the synagogue and declared to the people that he had been anointed by the Spirit to proclaim good news (4:16-21). That anointing came at Jesus’ baptism (cf. Acts 10:37-38).<\/p>\n<p>In his Gospel account, Luke tried to identify Jesus with the common people—for example, in the birth story (with Jesus born in a stable and visited by lowly shepherds, Lk 2:8-20) and through placing the genealogy (stressing Jesus’ relation to all of humanity, 3:38) right after the baptism. Thus, Luke saw the baptism as Jesus’ first step in identifying himself with those he had come to save.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the Messiah was always inseparable from the people he represented (see especially Jer 30:21 and Ez 45–46). Although the “servant” in Isaiah is sometimes viewed corporately (Is 44:1) and sometimes individually (53:3), he is always viewed as the representative <em>of the people<\/em> to the Lord (49:5-26), as well as the servant <em>of the Lord.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Evidently Luke, along with Mark and Matthew, was trying to show that Jesus, as the divine representative of the people, had identified himself with them in his baptism.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelofJohn\">The Gospel of John<\/p>\n<p>The fourth Gospel does not say that Jesus was baptized but does say that John the Baptist saw the Spirit descend upon Jesus (Jn 1:32-34). The account emphasizes that Jesus went to John during John’s preaching and baptizing ministry; John recognized that Jesus was the Christ, that God’s Spirit was upon him, and that he was the Son of God. John also recognized that Jesus, unlike himself, baptized with the Holy Spirit (1:29-36).<\/p>\n<p>John the Baptist described Jesus as the “Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (1:29, <span>nlt<\/span>). The closest OT parallel to that statement comes from a “servant of the Lord” passage (Is 53:6-7). It is possible that “Lamb of God” could be an alternate translation of the Aramaic term “servant of God.”<\/p>\n<p>The sense of Jesus as the one who bears the sins of the people is obviously in view in the fourth Gospel. That Jesus was the promised representative and deliverer of the people was understood by John the Baptist and conveyed by the Gospel writer.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>In the four Gospels it is clear that the Holy Spirit came upon Jesus at his baptism to enable him to do the work of God. All four Gospel writers saw that Jesus had been anointed by God to accomplish his mission of bringing salvation to the people. Those ideas provide a key to understanding why Jesus was baptized. On that occasion at the beginning of his ministry, God anointed Jesus with the Holy Spirit to do his mediating work between God and the people. At his baptism Jesus was identified as the one who would bear the people’s sins; Jesus was baptized to identify himself with sinful people.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BAPTISM OF JESUS* Major event in Jesus’ life, which marked the beginning of his ministry. The fact that John the Baptist baptized Jesus is disputed by very few scholars today, but the purpose and significance of Jesus’ baptism remain controversial. The Gospel accounts agree that John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance (Mt 3:6-10; Mk 1:4-5; Lk 3:3-14). He proclaimed that the kingdom of heaven was at hand and that God’s people should prepare for the Lord’s coming by a renewal of faith toward...","summary_en":"BAPTISM OF JESUS* Major event in Jesus’ life, which marked the beginning of his ministry. The fact that John the Baptist baptized Jesus is disputed by very few scholars today, but the purpose and significance of Jesus’ baptism remain controversial. The Gospel accounts agree that John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance (Mt 3:6-10; Mk 1:4-5; Lk 3:3-14). He proclaimed that the kingdom of heaven was at hand and that God’s people should prepare for the Lord’s coming by a renewal of faith toward...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":5418,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Body of Christ","title_en":"Body of Christ","content_ro":"<h3>BODY OF CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Scriptural phrase referring to (1) the physical body of Jesus Christ, (2) his broken body and shed blood viewed symbolically and memorially in the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper, and (3) both the local and universal church viewed metaphorically.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePhysicalBodyofJesusChrist\">The Physical Body of Jesus Christ<\/p>\n<p>The NT declares that the Son (the second person of the Trinity) had a human body prepared for him by God the Father (Heb 10:5). The earthly body was engendered by the conceptive work of the Holy Spirit through the virgin Mary (Mt 1:20); the one thus born, humanly speaking, as a descendant of David (Rom 1:3), was also to be called the Son of God (Lk 1:35). The apostle John emphasized that the body of Christ was really human physically, not something gaseous or ethereal (1 Jn 4:2-3) as some persons in John’s day were already beginning to argue. God “became flesh and dwelt among us” (Jn 1:14; cf. Is 53:1-4). Jesus’ earthly body possessed ordinary human characteristics and limitations. That is, as a real human being, Jesus Christ experienced sorrow (Jn 11:35; Heb 5:7-8), weariness (Jn 4:6), thirst (19:28), and pain (vv 1-3).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus gave up his spirit, his physical body died on the cross (Jn 19:30, 33). The NT proclaims that he bore the sins of the world in his body on the cross (1 Pt 2:24; 1 Jn 2:2; cf. Is 53:5-6). His death is described as a perfect sacrifice for sinners (Heb 9:12-14, 26-28), a sacrifice of his body that makes believers in him holy and righteous (2 Cor 5:21; Heb 10:10).<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s physical body was prepared in the normal way for burial (Mt 27:59; Mk 15:46; Lk 23:53, 56; 24:1; Jn 19:39-40) and placed in the rock tomb of Joseph of Arimathea (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:41). On the third day the body of Christ experienced a real physical resurrection, as he had predicted (Jn 2:19-22). He was seen in his physical resurrection body (Mt 28:9; Lk 24:31, 36; Jn 20:10-19, 26). He was heard, touched, and held onto (Mt 28:9; Lk 24:39; Jn 20:17; 1 Jn 1:1). He offered his body, scarred by his crucifixion, to be touched (Lk 24:39; Jn 20:17). The fact that he ate shows that his resurrection body was a physical one (Lk 24:42-43). In addition, Christ’s body was “glorified,” that is, it was not restricted as ordinary bodies are: he entered and left rooms in a remarkable way (Lk 24:31, 36; Jn 20:19, 26). Christ’s bodily resurrection is said in Scripture to guarantee that believers in Christ will experience resurrection of their own bodies (1 Cor 15:20-23, 50-57; Phil 3:20-21).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBodyofChristintheLordsSupper\">The Body of Christ in the Lord’s Supper<\/p>\n<p>At the last supper (Mt 26:26-29; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:15-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26), which accompanied the Passover supper, Jesus held up a loaf of bread and said, “This is my body”; then he picked up a cup of wine and said, “This is my blood of the covenant” (Mt 26:26, 28). Jesus meant that the bread symbolized his body, which would be broken when he was beaten at his trial and pierced at his crucifixion (Lk 23:33; Jn 19:1-2). The apostle Paul said that Christ, our paschal lamb, was sacrificed for us (1 Cor 5:7), meaning that the Passover lamb in the OT was an object lesson pointing to “the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!” (Jn 1:29).<\/p>\n<p>For Christians, the body of Christ is viewed symbolically as a broken body (Mt 8:17; 1 Pt 2:24; cf. Is 53:4-5) in the breaking of the bread at the Lord’s Supper. The cup is a sign of his blood poured out, viewed as the central factor in God’s covenant of grace with his people. Jesus referred to “the new covenant in my blood” (Lk 22:20). The whole ceremony of the Lord’s Supper was also to be a memorial (1 Cor 11:25-26). In the ceremony believers are reminded that Christ died for sinners, that is, for the forgiveness of their sins (Mt 26:28). They are also reminded that they are participating in the body of Christ in that they are united with him (Rom 6:1-11; 1 Cor 10:16; Gal 2:20; Phil 3:10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBodyofChristthePeopleofGod\">The Body of Christ, the People of God<\/p>\n<p>The phrase “body of Christ” is also used as a metaphor for the whole church, a unity of believers connected with and dependent on Christ. God’s people are thus said to be members of Christ’s “mystical body” (1 Cor 12:27), in fellowship with Christ and spiritually nourished by him (Eph 5:25, 29). A number of other metaphors are also used for the whole people of God, such as the vine (Ps 80:8), temple of God (1 Cor 3:16-17), building (1 Pt 2:5), chosen people (v 9), and family of God (Eph 3:15). Such metaphors amplify the interrelatedness, communion, and dependence of the “body of Christ” upon the living God.<\/p>\n<p>The term “body of Christ” was often used by Paul to remind a local church that it was a vital part of the larger body. Paul said to the church at Rome, “For as in one body we have many members, and all the members do not have the same function, so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another” (Rom 12:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). Paul taught the Corinthian Christians that they, individually and collectively, were part of the body of Christ (1 Cor 12:27). They and Paul were all baptized by one Spirit into that one body (Eph 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>In a number of passages written by Paul, the church is called the “body” and Christ the “head” (Col 1:18). Christ has been made “head over all things for the church,” which “is his body” (Eph 1:22-23). The body grows by “holding fast to the Head” (Col 2:19). As head of the body, Christ is its Savior (Eph 5:23). The head\/body metaphor stresses the organic dependence of the church on Christ and his lordship over the church. The church finds its self-understanding in terms of its Head. The relationship is organic in that the life flows from, and is sustained by, the Head. The relationship is immediate, direct, and complete. Apart from Christ, both in his historic atoning sacrifice and in his present position at the right hand of God, the church has no existence.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the term “body of Christ” is used to mean both the universal church and each local group of believers. In both senses the church is said to be the spiritual body in which believing Jews and Gentiles are united (Eph 2:14-16; 3:6; 4:4). It is the body that Christ redeemed (Eph 5:23), over which he presides (Col 1:18) and sovereignly rules (Eph 1:22-23) and for which he supplies strength and unity (Eph 4:15-16; Col 2:19).<\/p>\n<p>Each member of the body of Christ has been given spiritual gifts with which to serve Christ in the body (Rom 12:6; 1 Cor 12:11). Such gifts are enumerated several times in Scripture, and range from apostleship and pastoring to encouraging and showing mercy (Rom 12:7-8; Eph 4:11). The ministry of serving is to be shared by all Christians, for example, through giving to the physical needs of others (Acts 11:29-30; 1 Cor 16:1-4; 2 Cor 8:1-5) and praying for one another (Eph 1:15-23; 3:14-19; 6:18-20). No one should look down on others or on their gifts, since God has chosen each one to function in his or her place in the body (1 Cor 12:14-26). The gifts are given to equip “the saints, for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ” (Eph 4:12-13, <span>rsv<\/span>). The goal is “to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ” (vv 15-16, <span>rsv<\/span>). <em>See<\/em> Body; Church; Lord’s Supper, The; Resurrection.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BODY OF CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Scriptural phrase referring to (1) the physical body of Jesus Christ, (2) his broken body and shed blood viewed symbolically and memorially in the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper, and (3) both the local and universal church viewed metaphorically.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePhysicalBodyofJesusChrist\">The Physical Body of Jesus Christ<\/p>\n<p>The NT declares that the Son (the second person of the Trinity) had a human body prepared for him by God the Father (Heb 10:5). The earthly body was engendered by the conceptive work of the Holy Spirit through the virgin Mary (Mt 1:20); the one thus born, humanly speaking, as a descendant of David (Rom 1:3), was also to be called the Son of God (Lk 1:35). The apostle John emphasized that the body of Christ was really human physically, not something gaseous or ethereal (1 Jn 4:2-3) as some persons in John’s day were already beginning to argue. God “became flesh and dwelt among us” (Jn 1:14; cf. Is 53:1-4). Jesus’ earthly body possessed ordinary human characteristics and limitations. That is, as a real human being, Jesus Christ experienced sorrow (Jn 11:35; Heb 5:7-8), weariness (Jn 4:6), thirst (19:28), and pain (vv 1-3).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus gave up his spirit, his physical body died on the cross (Jn 19:30, 33). The NT proclaims that he bore the sins of the world in his body on the cross (1 Pt 2:24; 1 Jn 2:2; cf. Is 53:5-6). His death is described as a perfect sacrifice for sinners (Heb 9:12-14, 26-28), a sacrifice of his body that makes believers in him holy and righteous (2 Cor 5:21; Heb 10:10).<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s physical body was prepared in the normal way for burial (Mt 27:59; Mk 15:46; Lk 23:53, 56; 24:1; Jn 19:39-40) and placed in the rock tomb of Joseph of Arimathea (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:41). On the third day the body of Christ experienced a real physical resurrection, as he had predicted (Jn 2:19-22). He was seen in his physical resurrection body (Mt 28:9; Lk 24:31, 36; Jn 20:10-19, 26). He was heard, touched, and held onto (Mt 28:9; Lk 24:39; Jn 20:17; 1 Jn 1:1). He offered his body, scarred by his crucifixion, to be touched (Lk 24:39; Jn 20:17). The fact that he ate shows that his resurrection body was a physical one (Lk 24:42-43). In addition, Christ’s body was “glorified,” that is, it was not restricted as ordinary bodies are: he entered and left rooms in a remarkable way (Lk 24:31, 36; Jn 20:19, 26). Christ’s bodily resurrection is said in Scripture to guarantee that believers in Christ will experience resurrection of their own bodies (1 Cor 15:20-23, 50-57; Phil 3:20-21).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBodyofChristintheLordsSupper\">The Body of Christ in the Lord’s Supper<\/p>\n<p>At the last supper (Mt 26:26-29; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:15-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26), which accompanied the Passover supper, Jesus held up a loaf of bread and said, “This is my body”; then he picked up a cup of wine and said, “This is my blood of the covenant” (Mt 26:26, 28). Jesus meant that the bread symbolized his body, which would be broken when he was beaten at his trial and pierced at his crucifixion (Lk 23:33; Jn 19:1-2). The apostle Paul said that Christ, our paschal lamb, was sacrificed for us (1 Cor 5:7), meaning that the Passover lamb in the OT was an object lesson pointing to “the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!” (Jn 1:29).<\/p>\n<p>For Christians, the body of Christ is viewed symbolically as a broken body (Mt 8:17; 1 Pt 2:24; cf. Is 53:4-5) in the breaking of the bread at the Lord’s Supper. The cup is a sign of his blood poured out, viewed as the central factor in God’s covenant of grace with his people. Jesus referred to “the new covenant in my blood” (Lk 22:20). The whole ceremony of the Lord’s Supper was also to be a memorial (1 Cor 11:25-26). In the ceremony believers are reminded that Christ died for sinners, that is, for the forgiveness of their sins (Mt 26:28). They are also reminded that they are participating in the body of Christ in that they are united with him (Rom 6:1-11; 1 Cor 10:16; Gal 2:20; Phil 3:10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBodyofChristthePeopleofGod\">The Body of Christ, the People of God<\/p>\n<p>The phrase “body of Christ” is also used as a metaphor for the whole church, a unity of believers connected with and dependent on Christ. God’s people are thus said to be members of Christ’s “mystical body” (1 Cor 12:27), in fellowship with Christ and spiritually nourished by him (Eph 5:25, 29). A number of other metaphors are also used for the whole people of God, such as the vine (Ps 80:8), temple of God (1 Cor 3:16-17), building (1 Pt 2:5), chosen people (v 9), and family of God (Eph 3:15). Such metaphors amplify the interrelatedness, communion, and dependence of the “body of Christ” upon the living God.<\/p>\n<p>The term “body of Christ” was often used by Paul to remind a local church that it was a vital part of the larger body. Paul said to the church at Rome, “For as in one body we have many members, and all the members do not have the same function, so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another” (Rom 12:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). Paul taught the Corinthian Christians that they, individually and collectively, were part of the body of Christ (1 Cor 12:27). They and Paul were all baptized by one Spirit into that one body (Eph 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>In a number of passages written by Paul, the church is called the “body” and Christ the “head” (Col 1:18). Christ has been made “head over all things for the church,” which “is his body” (Eph 1:22-23). The body grows by “holding fast to the Head” (Col 2:19). As head of the body, Christ is its Savior (Eph 5:23). The head\/body metaphor stresses the organic dependence of the church on Christ and his lordship over the church. The church finds its self-understanding in terms of its Head. The relationship is organic in that the life flows from, and is sustained by, the Head. The relationship is immediate, direct, and complete. Apart from Christ, both in his historic atoning sacrifice and in his present position at the right hand of God, the church has no existence.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the term “body of Christ” is used to mean both the universal church and each local group of believers. In both senses the church is said to be the spiritual body in which believing Jews and Gentiles are united (Eph 2:14-16; 3:6; 4:4). It is the body that Christ redeemed (Eph 5:23), over which he presides (Col 1:18) and sovereignly rules (Eph 1:22-23) and for which he supplies strength and unity (Eph 4:15-16; Col 2:19).<\/p>\n<p>Each member of the body of Christ has been given spiritual gifts with which to serve Christ in the body (Rom 12:6; 1 Cor 12:11). Such gifts are enumerated several times in Scripture, and range from apostleship and pastoring to encouraging and showing mercy (Rom 12:7-8; Eph 4:11). The ministry of serving is to be shared by all Christians, for example, through giving to the physical needs of others (Acts 11:29-30; 1 Cor 16:1-4; 2 Cor 8:1-5) and praying for one another (Eph 1:15-23; 3:14-19; 6:18-20). No one should look down on others or on their gifts, since God has chosen each one to function in his or her place in the body (1 Cor 12:14-26). The gifts are given to equip “the saints, for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ” (Eph 4:12-13, <span>rsv<\/span>). The goal is “to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ” (vv 15-16, <span>rsv<\/span>). <em>See<\/em> Body; Church; Lord’s Supper, The; Resurrection.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BODY OF CHRIST Scriptural phrase referring to (1) the physical body of Jesus Christ, (2) his broken body and shed blood viewed symbolically and memorially in the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper, and (3) both the local and universal church viewed metaphorically. The Physical Body of Jesus Christ The NT declares that the Son (the second person of the Trinity) had a human body prepared for him by God the Father (Heb 10:5). The earthly body was engendered by the conceptive work of the Holy Sp...","summary_en":"BODY OF CHRIST Scriptural phrase referring to (1) the physical body of Jesus Christ, (2) his broken body and shed blood viewed symbolically and memorially in the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper, and (3) both the local and universal church viewed metaphorically. The Physical Body of Jesus Christ The NT declares that the Son (the second person of the Trinity) had a human body prepared for him by God the Father (Heb 10:5). The earthly body was engendered by the conceptive work of the Holy Sp...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":12221,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Feasts and Festivals of Israel","title_en":"Feasts and Festivals of Israel","content_ro":"<h3>FEASTS AND FESTIVALS OF ISRAEL<\/h3>\n<p>Occasions of public or private rejoicing to commemorate some significant event or personage. The element of celebration has a special meaning in the cycle of religious occasions and the rites and ceremonies associated with these particular days. While the idea of a feast commonly implies a banquet with plenteous food and drink, this element is not indispensable. Sometimes there is only a token amount, as in the celebration of Holy Communion.<\/p>\n\n<p>In contemporary usage “festival” usually refers to activities extending over a period of time, while “feast” indicates one part of the celebration, often a meal. However, in religious usage, both ancient and modern, the two words are used interchangeably. The ancient Hebrews employed the words <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mo’ed<\/span> (“seasons”) and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hag<\/span> for their great public celebrations, while feasts of a more private nature were commonly described by the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mishteh<\/span><em>.<\/em> The majority of English translations of Scripture do not differentiate between these words.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FeastsandTheirFunctions\">Feasts and Their Functions<\/p>\n<p>Each festival places great emphasis on community participation and on the continuity of social or religious tradition, especially where the celebrations are elements of a regular civil or religious calendar. Without community backing, even in a family celebration, no festival can be successful. When there is communal participation, a festival can reinforce the individual and community memory of specific occasions, and can perpetuate that store of recollection over years and generations. Such shared memory has a cohesive effect upon a cooperating community, large or small, and serves to establish the traditions by which the group lives. If the festival commemorates a particular event or celebrates some lofty ideal, that theme becomes more firmly embedded in the minds of the participants by being associated repeatedly with the rites and ceremonies performed. The feasts of the ancient Hebrews had this positive function. The great festivals of their religious calendar commemorated specific occasions when God had reached out in power to intervene for his people or had provided for them in their distress. By celebrating these feasts on a regular basis, the Hebrews continually affirmed that their God had directed their destiny. Their repeated rehearsal of God’s help and love for them reminded them that he was still able to sustain them. Especially in times of hardship, it pointed to the reality of God’s presence and activity among them. Faith sustained by this means furnished an invaluable spiritual dimension to the life of the nation and provided a sense of continuity under divine provision and guidance. Only when corrupt or pagan elements were introduced into festive occasions did this important ingredient of national life begin to lose its vitality.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentFestivals\">Old Testament Festivals<\/p>\n<h5>General Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>These occasions were surprisingly numerous in Israel, considering the rather austere mode of life reflected in much of the OT. No doubt such celebrations offset or compensated for the hardships and insecurities of existence in the ancient Near East, and the Israelites made the most of every opportunity. A wedding was one of the most obvious occasions for celebration, and it is not surprising that a feast was prepared for the marriage of Rachel and Jacob (Gn 29:22) in which the whole neighborhood participated. Just how long this particular feast lasted is unknown, but some marriage festivals continued for a week, as in the case of the marriage between Samson and the woman of Timnah (Jgs 14:17). Wine that makes glad man’s heart (Ps 104:15) was consumed freely on such occasions.<\/p>\n<p>Birthdays were often observed in a festive spirit, especially where a royal person was concerned (Gn 40:20). Solomon’s dream was commemorated with a feast provided for his servants (1 Kgs 3:15), and when the temple was dedicated, the occasion was celebrated for a full week (8:65). Kings and queens held feasts periodically to mark certain occasions or to express goodwill (cf. Est 1:3; 2:18; 5:4, 14; 7:2, 7; Dn 5:1). Herdsmen traditionally made a feast for the shearing of the first sheep (Dt 18:4).<\/p>\n<h5>Preexilic Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>In addition to the general festivals, which were frequently of a secular nature, communal feasts were prescribed for the Israelites that had a specifically spiritual significance. They were meant to emphasize the activity of God on behalf of his people and to remind them that continued divine blessing depended upon their obedience to his will. The catalog of festivals in Leviticus 23:2 began with an injunction to observe the Sabbath. The seventh day, in which God ceased from creating (Gn 2:3), was holy, though it is difficult to determine the extent to which it was kept until the time of Moses (Ex 20:8-11). From that time on, Sabbath observance stressed refraining from all work so as to commemorate properly God’s own rest from creative activity (31:17) and his deliverance of his people from bondage in Egypt (Dt 5:12-15). Sabbath celebration was the sign of a special relationship between God and the Israelites. During this 24-hour period, even trivial tasks like making a fire (Ex 35:3) or gathering wood (Nm 15:32-33) were prohibited on pain of death. Journeys of any distance also came under the Sabbath ban (Ex 16:29). Special offerings were part of the observance (Nm 28:9-10), and the bread of the Presence was replaced in the tabernacle (Lv 24:5-8). Despite the restrictions on activity, the Sabbath was meant to symbolize a time of happiness and security in the presence of God (cf. Is 58:13-14), since its observance would bring blessing to the individual and to the whole land.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of the New Moon<\/h6>\n<p>The new moon was a monthly celebration based on the lunar calendar. It was especially appropriate for an agricultural people, since everyone could tell when the moon was new. Special offerings were prescribed for this festival, consisting of a burnt sacrifice, a grain offering, and a drink offering (Nm 28:11-15). In addition, a male goat was sacrificed to God as a sin offering, and trumpet blasts were sounded over the sacrificial offerings as a memorial before God (10:10). The sacrifices prescribed for the new moon festival were significantly greater than those required in Numbers 28:9-10 for the weekly Sabbath.<\/p>\n<p>This lunar feast was popular throughout Israelite history. During the monarchy, the Levites were required to assist the Aaronic priests at the new moon festival, as well as on the Sabbath (1 Chr 23:29-31). The preexilic prophets may well have taken advantage of the large gatherings to give guidance to the people or proclaim prophetic oracles (cf. 2 Kgs 4:23), though to what extent this was done is uncertain. Not everyone found the period of rest and celebration valuable, however, and Amos (Am 8:5) complained about those avaricious Israelites who felt that such observances interfered with the business of making a living. The feast could not be observed when the Judeans were in exile in Babylonia (cf. Hos 2:11), but under Ezra and Nehemiah, its observance was restored (Neh 10:33). In Isaiah 66:22-23 it was related to Israel’s final destiny and was an accepted part of the ordinances for Ezekiel’s ideal temple (Ez 45:17).<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the festival was to enhance the unity of national life by reminding the Israelites that God’s covenant with their ancestors was permanent and still binding upon the nation. It also stressed the loving nature and providence of a God who could begin such a relationship and carry out his promises with complete faithfulness (cf. Ps 104:19).<\/p>\n<h6>The Festival of Trumpets<\/h6>\n<p>The Festival of Trumpets was celebrated on the first day of the seventh new moon. This month, subsequently named Tishri, was especially holy, and for this reason was governed by certain regulations different from those of ordinary new moon festivals. The trumpets were blown on the first day (Lv 23:24) as the animal and cereal sacrifices were offered. From Numbers 29:2-6 it appears that the offerings required for this particular feast exceeded those prescribed for normal Sabbath sacrifice, but were somewhat less than those required for the regular new moon festival (cf. Nm 28:11). This feast was to be observed as a day of solemn rest and as a holy convocation, and the trumpets were sounded as a triumphant memorial to God’s great provision for his people through the Sinai covenant.<\/p>\n<p>The seventh month was particularly sacred, partly because of its place in the hallowed cycle of sevens, but also because the Day of Atonement (or Yom Kippur) and the Feast of Tabernacles, or Booths (Shelters), occurred during this period. The latter feast followed the Day of Atonement by some five days (Lv 23:33), and its joyful character served to offset somewhat the solemnity of the annual penitential occasion when the nation confessed its collective sins and saw them banished symbolically into the wilderness as the scapegoat was driven from the congregation.<\/p>\n<h6>The Sabbatical Year<\/h6>\n<p>Another festival closely connected with the institution of the Sabbath was the sabbatical year. At the end of each cycle of six years, the following 12 months were observed as a “sabbath of rest for the land.” During this interval, the ground was to lie fallow (Ex 23:11) without any form of cultivation, and whatever sprouted and grew from it naturally was assigned to the poor and needy (Lv 25:6). This provision for the land itself constituted one of the most important ecological principles of Scripture. Like God’s people, the land was holy, and just as they needed to have regular intervals of rest from daily work in order to regain their energy and spiritual vitality through worship, so the ground needed to rest and recuperate from the strain of constant cultivation. The festival reminded the Israelites that the land on which they lived had been given to them by God in fulfillment of his covenant undertaking to provide richly for their physical needs (cf. Dt 8:7-10). To keep the Israelites from experiencing any shortages or other hardships during the Year of Sabbath, God promised that in the year immediately preceding the sabbatical period, the land would bear fruit to suffice for the next three years (Lv 25:21). This assurance was based upon the experience of the wilderness wanderings, when on the sixth day of the week sufficient manna appeared to last through the Sabbath (Ex 16:5).<\/p>\n<p>In this festival period, God’s absolute claim over the land was reaffirmed (cf. Lv 25:23), and the faith of the nation in God’s ability to provide for future needs was reinforced. The provisions that freed the land for a year from agricultural bondage were paralleled in the seventh year of rest by those requiring liberation of slaves and debtors. These underprivileged members of society were to be released from their obligations of servitude. As a result, men and women who had become slaves for one reason or another were given personal liberty (Ex 21:2-6), and under proclamation of the Lord’s release, the provisions applying to debt were rescinded (Dt 15:1-6). The sabbatical year seems to have been a regular part of preexilic Israelite life, although some abuses were noted in Jeremiah 34:8-22. There the prophet took advantage of the opportunity presented to instruct the people in the nature and purpose of the sabbatical year ordinance. He also warned the wayward Judeans that because they had disobeyed the commands of God in denying proper liberty to their slaves, they would have their own freedom taken away in a far more serious manner by being carried captive to Babylonia after seeing their land destroyed. The lesson was not lost upon those who returned from exile, for under the administration of Nehemiah, the Jews bound themselves by a covenant to observe the principle of the sabbatical year (Neh 10:31). This undertaking evidently took its impetus from the reading of the law of Moses at the Feast of Booths (Shelters), which coincidentally occurred at the beginning of the sabbatical year (Neh 8:13-18).<\/p>\n<h6>Jubilee<\/h6>\n<p>Still another feast based on the principle of the sabbath was the Year of Jubilee, or Pentecostal year (Lv 25:8-55; 27:17-24). As the sabbatical year was related to the concept of the seventh day, so the Pentecostal (50th) year marked the completion of a cycle of seven sabbatical years. The commencement of a jubilee year was proclaimed on the Day of Atonement throughout the land by means of trumpet blasts (Lv 25:9). The activities that took place during the Pentecostal year were similar to those prescribed for the sabbatical year. A special feature was that land that had been sold during the preceding 49 years was returned to its original owners, a procedure that sometimes involved financial adjustments. To prevent abuse of the process through opportunism or speculation, the Hebrews were instructed to deal fairly and honestly with one another in the fear of God, who was the real owner of the land (Lv 25:14-17). As with the sabbatical year, God promised to make provision before the jubilee year so that no one would suffer hardship. It was during the Year of Jubilee that those who were slaves in Hebrew households were given their liberty, so that everyone in the land would commence a new cycle of sabbatical years on the same footing, as free persons under God.<\/p>\n<h5>Seasonal Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>Three annual festivals that followed the seasons of the year rather than phases of the moon furnished important occasions for commemorating God’s power and provision in national life. These festivals were designated by the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hag<\/span><em>,<\/em> indicating a festival usually observed by some sort of pilgrimage. These three festivals were prescribed in Exodus 23:14-17 and Deuteronomy 16:16, and consisted of the Feast of Passover and Unleavened Bread, the Feast of Weeks (Pentecost), and the Festival of Booths (Tabernacles). On these occasions, all the males of Israel were commanded to make pilgrimage to the sanctuary and celebrate these festivals (Ex 12:14). The Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread were originally separate ordinances, but since the latter always followed immediately upon the Passover rite, they naturally blended into a single festival.<\/p>\n<h6>Passover<\/h6>\n<p>The Passover was of supreme theological significance for the Israelites, since it marked one of the most momentous acts of divine intervention in their history, the beginning of their deliverance from bondage in Egypt when, in the final plague, God destroyed the firstborn of the Egyptians but spared those Israelites whose homes had blood smeared on the doorposts (Ex 12:11-30). God commanded that the day was to be observed as a memorial feast (v 14), and the next Passover celebration occurred in the Sinai Desert (Nm 9:1-5). In the Hebrew calendar the Passover festival came in the first month, called Abib in Deuteronomy 16:1, but known after the exile as Nisan (cf. Neh 2:1). The Passover rite took place the 14th evening (Lv 23:5), and this was followed by a seven-day period during which nothing leavened was to be eaten. The principle for removing all leaven from bread was similar to that underlying the draining of blood from animal flesh. Both leaven and blood had quickening power and were to be kept separate as an offering to God. The first and seventh days of this period were marked by a holy assembly, during which the only work permitted was the preparation of food (Ex 12:16). This period when unleavened bread was eaten was described as a festival because it opened the seven-week period of grain harvest (Dt 16:9). During this feast, special burnt sacrifices were offered, followed with a sheaf of newly harvested barley at the Feast of Firstfruits. By NT times the festivals of Passover and Unleavened Bread were well-attended celebrations and were known as the “days of unleavened bread” (Lk 22:1; Acts 12:3). The theme of Israel’s deliverance from the power of Egypt by divine intervention assured the Israelites that God was always ready to act on behalf of a faithful and obedient covenant people. It also reminded them that they had once been slaves (Dt 16:12). In Israelite life the early Passover and Unleavened Bread observances were comparatively simple in character, but during the monarchy more elaborate Passover rituals came into use (cf. 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 35:1-19).<\/p>\n<h6>Pentecost<\/h6>\n<p>The second great festival, Pentecost (or Weeks) lasted one day only and was observed on the 50th day after the newly harvested barley sheaf had been waved before the Lord at the end of the Feast of Unleavened Bread (Dt 16:9-12). The festival marked the end of the barley harvest and the beginning of the wheat harvest, the beginning of the period when firstfruits could be offered (cf. Ex 23:16; 34:22; Nm 28:26). The feast day was marked by the presentation of two wheat-flour loaves along with sacrifices of seven lambs, two rams, and a bull (Lv 23:15-20). Freewill gifts to God were presented to reflect gratitude for his blessings, and the entire occasion was one of communal rejoicing (Dt 16:10-11). Since Pentecost was essentially a harvest festival (Ex 23:16), the Israelites were called on to recognize that they depended entirely upon God for their material prosperity. In Deuteronomy 26, specific instructions were given for the ritual of presenting firstfruits from the harvest. It comprised a great confession of faith set within the framework of Israel’s history, and it recounted God’s deliverance of the nation from Egyptian oppression and his provision of a land that could amply supply the needs of his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of Tabernacles<\/h6>\n<p>This festival, known variously as the Feast of Booths, Tabernacles, Shelters (Lv 23:34; Dt 16:13), or Ingathering (Ex 34:22), was the third great occasion that all Hebrew males were required to observe annually. It began on the 15th day of the seventh month (Tishri), shortly after the observance of the Day of Atonement, which fell on the 10th day. The Feast of Booths lasted for one week and involved pilgrimage. It was associated initially with the end of the year (Ex 34:22), when the agricultural work had been completed. The first day was marked by a symbolic cessation from all activity, after which burnt offerings were presented to the Lord. The eighth day was also one on which the congregation of Israel abstained from manual work and again offered burnt sacrifices. Leviticus 23:39-43 furnished details for the rituals that gave the festival its special name of booths or shelters or tabernacles. The fruit of “goodly trees” was to be gathered on the first day of the feast, along with palm fronds, willow branches, and boughs from trees in full leaf. From these, rough shelters or booths were to be constructed in which the people lived for the week of the feast. Every seventh year the observances were marked by a public recital of the covenant provisions to which the Israelites under Moses had committed themselves, a procedure designed to keep fresh in their minds the obligations as well as the blessings of the covenant relationship. A particularly significant observance of the Feast of Tabernacles took place in the time of Ezra, when the Judean community returned from Babylon—a celebration of a kind unknown for centuries (Neh 8:13-18). From the context it appears that observance of the feast had lapsed during the monarchy. The feast at Shiloh where Hannah was mistaken for a drunken woman and the feast referred to in Judges 21:19 were evidently the Feast of Booths. In a prophetic vision in which he saw all nations coming to Jerusalem to observe the Festival of Booths, Zechariah warned that those who did not continue this tradition could expect hardship and shortages of food (Zec 14:16-19).<\/p>\n<h5>Postexilic Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>There are a few minor festivals that were created in the period after the Jews returned from exile; some of these festivals had their origin in specific historical occasions.<\/p>\n<h6>The Festival of Purim<\/h6>\n<p>The Festival of Purim, also known as the Festival of Lots, was a joyful occasion occurring on the 14th day of the 12th month (Adar). It celebrated the way in which Esther and Mordecai were used by God to deliver his people in the Persian Empire from extermination by Haman (Est 9:21, 24-28). The feast was observed on the 14th day of Adar by those living in villages, and on the 15th by the inhabitants of walled towns and cities. The explanation of the name of the festival is given in Esther 9:24-26, and its observance reminded the Hebrews of God’s ability to save them during a time of anti-Semitic activity in Persia. The deliverance memorialized in this festival has consoled the Jews on other occasions when they have suffered persecution. Traditionally the scroll of Esther was read aloud in the synagogue on the evening before the feast, and there was a great outcry, especially among the children present, whenever the names of the hated Haman and his sons were mentioned.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of the Dedication of the Temple<\/h6>\n<p>Another joyous festival that lasted for eight days was the Feast of the Dedication of the Temple (1 Macc 4:52-59; 2 Macc 10:6-8), familiar to modern readers as Hanukkah, or the Festival of Lights. The specific dedication that prompted the feast occurred in 164 <span>BC<\/span>, when Judas Maccabeus reconsecrated the temple in Jerusalem after it had been defiled by Antiochus IV Epiphanes. The celebrations commenced on the 25th day of the ninth month (Kislev) and were marked at night by blazing lights and lanterns. The stories of brave opposition by the Maccabees to the crushing forces of paganism were recounted, and the feast was one of praise to God for his marvelous deliverance of the Jews during the Maccabean period.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentFestivals\">New Testament Festivals<\/p>\n<p>In Christ’s time the Sabbath was observed rigorously and was the occasion for synagogue worship (cf. Lk 4:16; Acts 13:14; 18:4). Pharisaic law prohibited all work, and Jesus came into conflict with the authorities periodically for breaches of the Sabbath regulations (cf. Mt 12:1-4; Mk 3:1-5; Lk 13:10-17). In the primitive church, worship occurred on “the first day of the week” (i.e., Sunday) to commemorate Christ’s resurrection. The early Christians initially participated in Jewish ceremonies (cf. Acts 20:16; 1 Cor 16:8). It was during the Feast of Pentecost, after Christ’s resurrection and ascension, that the Spirit was poured out (Acts 2:1-4), fulfilling Joel 2:28-32 and commencing the history of the Christian church as such.<\/p>\n<p>The Passover and Feast of Unleavened Bread were of great significance in the life of Christ (cf. Jn 4:45; 5:1; 6:4; 12:1-26), for the occasion was a very popular one in NT times (cf. 12:20). On the Passover, Pilate had instituted the custom of clemency to a prisoner nominated by the populace (Mt 27:15; Mk 15:6). Jesus participated actively in the Passover rituals (cf. Lk 2:42; Jn 2:13; 6:4). The Last Supper with his disciples occurred just prior to the Passover (Jn 13:1), when Judas Iscariot betrayed Jesus to the Pharisees (Lk 22:4-6). The breaking of bread and the drinking of wine at that Passover celebration (Mk 14:22-25) were related directly to Christ’s forthcoming death on the cross in a sacramental manner. Christ’s disciples were instructed to observe this rite as a memorial of his suffering and death for human sin (1 Cor 11:24-26) and as a proclamation of the power of the cross until the Lord returns in glory. Some scholars have suggested that Christ was actually hanging on the cross when the Passover lamb was being slaughtered, and if that chronology is correct, it would represent Jesus graphically as the “Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world” (Jn 1:29, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus was also present once when the Feast of Tabernacles was celebrated (7:10). In his day water was carried in procession from the pool of Siloam as an offering to God, and the ceremony most probably prompted Christ’s discourse on living water and eternal life (vv 37-39). On at least one occasion Jesus was in Jerusalem when the Festival of Lights occurred (Jn 10:22) and narrowly missed death by stoning.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was entertained occasionally at private feasts (cf. Lk 5:29), and once remedied an emergency situation when the wine ran out at a wedding ceremony (Jn 2:8-10). He was critical of the Pharisees for securing the chief seats at feasts (Mt 23:6; Mk 12:39; Lk 20:46) and taught that festivals ought to benefit the poor (Lk 14:13).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SymbolismofFeasts\">Symbolism of Feasts<\/p>\n<p>Many aspects of the ancient Hebrew feasts were interpreted symbolically in the early church. Paul regarded the earliest Hebrew Christians as the firstfruits of the Israel of God (Rom 11:16). In Romans 8:23, the Holy Spirit as possessed by Christians was regarded as only a token of what was to come, and as such was the firstfruit of the Spirit. Christians themselves were described in James 1:18 as the firstfruits of God’s creatures who were brought forth by the Word of Truth. The resurrection of Jesus was considered by Paul to be the firstfruits of those who slept (1 Cor 15:20, 23). In an allusion to OT festivals, Paul spoke of the Sabbaths, new moons, and feasts as merely being a shadow of good things to come (Col 2:16-17). The Passover was used figuratively to emphasize that Christ our Passover Lamb had been sacrificed for us. Believers were urged to keep the feast with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth, and not with the old leaven of malice and evil (1 Cor 5:7-8).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Calendars, Ancient and Modern; Offerings and Sacrifices; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FEASTS AND FESTIVALS OF ISRAEL<\/h3>\n<p>Occasions of public or private rejoicing to commemorate some significant event or personage. The element of celebration has a special meaning in the cycle of religious occasions and the rites and ceremonies associated with these particular days. While the idea of a feast commonly implies a banquet with plenteous food and drink, this element is not indispensable. Sometimes there is only a token amount, as in the celebration of Holy Communion.<\/p>\n\n<p>In contemporary usage “festival” usually refers to activities extending over a period of time, while “feast” indicates one part of the celebration, often a meal. However, in religious usage, both ancient and modern, the two words are used interchangeably. The ancient Hebrews employed the words <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mo’ed<\/span> (“seasons”) and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hag<\/span> for their great public celebrations, while feasts of a more private nature were commonly described by the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mishteh<\/span><em>.<\/em> The majority of English translations of Scripture do not differentiate between these words.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FeastsandTheirFunctions\">Feasts and Their Functions<\/p>\n<p>Each festival places great emphasis on community participation and on the continuity of social or religious tradition, especially where the celebrations are elements of a regular civil or religious calendar. Without community backing, even in a family celebration, no festival can be successful. When there is communal participation, a festival can reinforce the individual and community memory of specific occasions, and can perpetuate that store of recollection over years and generations. Such shared memory has a cohesive effect upon a cooperating community, large or small, and serves to establish the traditions by which the group lives. If the festival commemorates a particular event or celebrates some lofty ideal, that theme becomes more firmly embedded in the minds of the participants by being associated repeatedly with the rites and ceremonies performed. The feasts of the ancient Hebrews had this positive function. The great festivals of their religious calendar commemorated specific occasions when God had reached out in power to intervene for his people or had provided for them in their distress. By celebrating these feasts on a regular basis, the Hebrews continually affirmed that their God had directed their destiny. Their repeated rehearsal of God’s help and love for them reminded them that he was still able to sustain them. Especially in times of hardship, it pointed to the reality of God’s presence and activity among them. Faith sustained by this means furnished an invaluable spiritual dimension to the life of the nation and provided a sense of continuity under divine provision and guidance. Only when corrupt or pagan elements were introduced into festive occasions did this important ingredient of national life begin to lose its vitality.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentFestivals\">Old Testament Festivals<\/p>\n<h5>General Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>These occasions were surprisingly numerous in Israel, considering the rather austere mode of life reflected in much of the OT. No doubt such celebrations offset or compensated for the hardships and insecurities of existence in the ancient Near East, and the Israelites made the most of every opportunity. A wedding was one of the most obvious occasions for celebration, and it is not surprising that a feast was prepared for the marriage of Rachel and Jacob (Gn 29:22) in which the whole neighborhood participated. Just how long this particular feast lasted is unknown, but some marriage festivals continued for a week, as in the case of the marriage between Samson and the woman of Timnah (Jgs 14:17). Wine that makes glad man’s heart (Ps 104:15) was consumed freely on such occasions.<\/p>\n<p>Birthdays were often observed in a festive spirit, especially where a royal person was concerned (Gn 40:20). Solomon’s dream was commemorated with a feast provided for his servants (1 Kgs 3:15), and when the temple was dedicated, the occasion was celebrated for a full week (8:65). Kings and queens held feasts periodically to mark certain occasions or to express goodwill (cf. Est 1:3; 2:18; 5:4, 14; 7:2, 7; Dn 5:1). Herdsmen traditionally made a feast for the shearing of the first sheep (Dt 18:4).<\/p>\n<h5>Preexilic Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>In addition to the general festivals, which were frequently of a secular nature, communal feasts were prescribed for the Israelites that had a specifically spiritual significance. They were meant to emphasize the activity of God on behalf of his people and to remind them that continued divine blessing depended upon their obedience to his will. The catalog of festivals in Leviticus 23:2 began with an injunction to observe the Sabbath. The seventh day, in which God ceased from creating (Gn 2:3), was holy, though it is difficult to determine the extent to which it was kept until the time of Moses (Ex 20:8-11). From that time on, Sabbath observance stressed refraining from all work so as to commemorate properly God’s own rest from creative activity (31:17) and his deliverance of his people from bondage in Egypt (Dt 5:12-15). Sabbath celebration was the sign of a special relationship between God and the Israelites. During this 24-hour period, even trivial tasks like making a fire (Ex 35:3) or gathering wood (Nm 15:32-33) were prohibited on pain of death. Journeys of any distance also came under the Sabbath ban (Ex 16:29). Special offerings were part of the observance (Nm 28:9-10), and the bread of the Presence was replaced in the tabernacle (Lv 24:5-8). Despite the restrictions on activity, the Sabbath was meant to symbolize a time of happiness and security in the presence of God (cf. Is 58:13-14), since its observance would bring blessing to the individual and to the whole land.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of the New Moon<\/h6>\n<p>The new moon was a monthly celebration based on the lunar calendar. It was especially appropriate for an agricultural people, since everyone could tell when the moon was new. Special offerings were prescribed for this festival, consisting of a burnt sacrifice, a grain offering, and a drink offering (Nm 28:11-15). In addition, a male goat was sacrificed to God as a sin offering, and trumpet blasts were sounded over the sacrificial offerings as a memorial before God (10:10). The sacrifices prescribed for the new moon festival were significantly greater than those required in Numbers 28:9-10 for the weekly Sabbath.<\/p>\n<p>This lunar feast was popular throughout Israelite history. During the monarchy, the Levites were required to assist the Aaronic priests at the new moon festival, as well as on the Sabbath (1 Chr 23:29-31). The preexilic prophets may well have taken advantage of the large gatherings to give guidance to the people or proclaim prophetic oracles (cf. 2 Kgs 4:23), though to what extent this was done is uncertain. Not everyone found the period of rest and celebration valuable, however, and Amos (Am 8:5) complained about those avaricious Israelites who felt that such observances interfered with the business of making a living. The feast could not be observed when the Judeans were in exile in Babylonia (cf. Hos 2:11), but under Ezra and Nehemiah, its observance was restored (Neh 10:33). In Isaiah 66:22-23 it was related to Israel’s final destiny and was an accepted part of the ordinances for Ezekiel’s ideal temple (Ez 45:17).<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the festival was to enhance the unity of national life by reminding the Israelites that God’s covenant with their ancestors was permanent and still binding upon the nation. It also stressed the loving nature and providence of a God who could begin such a relationship and carry out his promises with complete faithfulness (cf. Ps 104:19).<\/p>\n<h6>The Festival of Trumpets<\/h6>\n<p>The Festival of Trumpets was celebrated on the first day of the seventh new moon. This month, subsequently named Tishri, was especially holy, and for this reason was governed by certain regulations different from those of ordinary new moon festivals. The trumpets were blown on the first day (Lv 23:24) as the animal and cereal sacrifices were offered. From Numbers 29:2-6 it appears that the offerings required for this particular feast exceeded those prescribed for normal Sabbath sacrifice, but were somewhat less than those required for the regular new moon festival (cf. Nm 28:11). This feast was to be observed as a day of solemn rest and as a holy convocation, and the trumpets were sounded as a triumphant memorial to God’s great provision for his people through the Sinai covenant.<\/p>\n<p>The seventh month was particularly sacred, partly because of its place in the hallowed cycle of sevens, but also because the Day of Atonement (or Yom Kippur) and the Feast of Tabernacles, or Booths (Shelters), occurred during this period. The latter feast followed the Day of Atonement by some five days (Lv 23:33), and its joyful character served to offset somewhat the solemnity of the annual penitential occasion when the nation confessed its collective sins and saw them banished symbolically into the wilderness as the scapegoat was driven from the congregation.<\/p>\n<h6>The Sabbatical Year<\/h6>\n<p>Another festival closely connected with the institution of the Sabbath was the sabbatical year. At the end of each cycle of six years, the following 12 months were observed as a “sabbath of rest for the land.” During this interval, the ground was to lie fallow (Ex 23:11) without any form of cultivation, and whatever sprouted and grew from it naturally was assigned to the poor and needy (Lv 25:6). This provision for the land itself constituted one of the most important ecological principles of Scripture. Like God’s people, the land was holy, and just as they needed to have regular intervals of rest from daily work in order to regain their energy and spiritual vitality through worship, so the ground needed to rest and recuperate from the strain of constant cultivation. The festival reminded the Israelites that the land on which they lived had been given to them by God in fulfillment of his covenant undertaking to provide richly for their physical needs (cf. Dt 8:7-10). To keep the Israelites from experiencing any shortages or other hardships during the Year of Sabbath, God promised that in the year immediately preceding the sabbatical period, the land would bear fruit to suffice for the next three years (Lv 25:21). This assurance was based upon the experience of the wilderness wanderings, when on the sixth day of the week sufficient manna appeared to last through the Sabbath (Ex 16:5).<\/p>\n<p>In this festival period, God’s absolute claim over the land was reaffirmed (cf. Lv 25:23), and the faith of the nation in God’s ability to provide for future needs was reinforced. The provisions that freed the land for a year from agricultural bondage were paralleled in the seventh year of rest by those requiring liberation of slaves and debtors. These underprivileged members of society were to be released from their obligations of servitude. As a result, men and women who had become slaves for one reason or another were given personal liberty (Ex 21:2-6), and under proclamation of the Lord’s release, the provisions applying to debt were rescinded (Dt 15:1-6). The sabbatical year seems to have been a regular part of preexilic Israelite life, although some abuses were noted in Jeremiah 34:8-22. There the prophet took advantage of the opportunity presented to instruct the people in the nature and purpose of the sabbatical year ordinance. He also warned the wayward Judeans that because they had disobeyed the commands of God in denying proper liberty to their slaves, they would have their own freedom taken away in a far more serious manner by being carried captive to Babylonia after seeing their land destroyed. The lesson was not lost upon those who returned from exile, for under the administration of Nehemiah, the Jews bound themselves by a covenant to observe the principle of the sabbatical year (Neh 10:31). This undertaking evidently took its impetus from the reading of the law of Moses at the Feast of Booths (Shelters), which coincidentally occurred at the beginning of the sabbatical year (Neh 8:13-18).<\/p>\n<h6>Jubilee<\/h6>\n<p>Still another feast based on the principle of the sabbath was the Year of Jubilee, or Pentecostal year (Lv 25:8-55; 27:17-24). As the sabbatical year was related to the concept of the seventh day, so the Pentecostal (50th) year marked the completion of a cycle of seven sabbatical years. The commencement of a jubilee year was proclaimed on the Day of Atonement throughout the land by means of trumpet blasts (Lv 25:9). The activities that took place during the Pentecostal year were similar to those prescribed for the sabbatical year. A special feature was that land that had been sold during the preceding 49 years was returned to its original owners, a procedure that sometimes involved financial adjustments. To prevent abuse of the process through opportunism or speculation, the Hebrews were instructed to deal fairly and honestly with one another in the fear of God, who was the real owner of the land (Lv 25:14-17). As with the sabbatical year, God promised to make provision before the jubilee year so that no one would suffer hardship. It was during the Year of Jubilee that those who were slaves in Hebrew households were given their liberty, so that everyone in the land would commence a new cycle of sabbatical years on the same footing, as free persons under God.<\/p>\n<h5>Seasonal Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>Three annual festivals that followed the seasons of the year rather than phases of the moon furnished important occasions for commemorating God’s power and provision in national life. These festivals were designated by the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hag<\/span><em>,<\/em> indicating a festival usually observed by some sort of pilgrimage. These three festivals were prescribed in Exodus 23:14-17 and Deuteronomy 16:16, and consisted of the Feast of Passover and Unleavened Bread, the Feast of Weeks (Pentecost), and the Festival of Booths (Tabernacles). On these occasions, all the males of Israel were commanded to make pilgrimage to the sanctuary and celebrate these festivals (Ex 12:14). The Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread were originally separate ordinances, but since the latter always followed immediately upon the Passover rite, they naturally blended into a single festival.<\/p>\n<h6>Passover<\/h6>\n<p>The Passover was of supreme theological significance for the Israelites, since it marked one of the most momentous acts of divine intervention in their history, the beginning of their deliverance from bondage in Egypt when, in the final plague, God destroyed the firstborn of the Egyptians but spared those Israelites whose homes had blood smeared on the doorposts (Ex 12:11-30). God commanded that the day was to be observed as a memorial feast (v 14), and the next Passover celebration occurred in the Sinai Desert (Nm 9:1-5). In the Hebrew calendar the Passover festival came in the first month, called Abib in Deuteronomy 16:1, but known after the exile as Nisan (cf. Neh 2:1). The Passover rite took place the 14th evening (Lv 23:5), and this was followed by a seven-day period during which nothing leavened was to be eaten. The principle for removing all leaven from bread was similar to that underlying the draining of blood from animal flesh. Both leaven and blood had quickening power and were to be kept separate as an offering to God. The first and seventh days of this period were marked by a holy assembly, during which the only work permitted was the preparation of food (Ex 12:16). This period when unleavened bread was eaten was described as a festival because it opened the seven-week period of grain harvest (Dt 16:9). During this feast, special burnt sacrifices were offered, followed with a sheaf of newly harvested barley at the Feast of Firstfruits. By NT times the festivals of Passover and Unleavened Bread were well-attended celebrations and were known as the “days of unleavened bread” (Lk 22:1; Acts 12:3). The theme of Israel’s deliverance from the power of Egypt by divine intervention assured the Israelites that God was always ready to act on behalf of a faithful and obedient covenant people. It also reminded them that they had once been slaves (Dt 16:12). In Israelite life the early Passover and Unleavened Bread observances were comparatively simple in character, but during the monarchy more elaborate Passover rituals came into use (cf. 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 35:1-19).<\/p>\n<h6>Pentecost<\/h6>\n<p>The second great festival, Pentecost (or Weeks) lasted one day only and was observed on the 50th day after the newly harvested barley sheaf had been waved before the Lord at the end of the Feast of Unleavened Bread (Dt 16:9-12). The festival marked the end of the barley harvest and the beginning of the wheat harvest, the beginning of the period when firstfruits could be offered (cf. Ex 23:16; 34:22; Nm 28:26). The feast day was marked by the presentation of two wheat-flour loaves along with sacrifices of seven lambs, two rams, and a bull (Lv 23:15-20). Freewill gifts to God were presented to reflect gratitude for his blessings, and the entire occasion was one of communal rejoicing (Dt 16:10-11). Since Pentecost was essentially a harvest festival (Ex 23:16), the Israelites were called on to recognize that they depended entirely upon God for their material prosperity. In Deuteronomy 26, specific instructions were given for the ritual of presenting firstfruits from the harvest. It comprised a great confession of faith set within the framework of Israel’s history, and it recounted God’s deliverance of the nation from Egyptian oppression and his provision of a land that could amply supply the needs of his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of Tabernacles<\/h6>\n<p>This festival, known variously as the Feast of Booths, Tabernacles, Shelters (Lv 23:34; Dt 16:13), or Ingathering (Ex 34:22), was the third great occasion that all Hebrew males were required to observe annually. It began on the 15th day of the seventh month (Tishri), shortly after the observance of the Day of Atonement, which fell on the 10th day. The Feast of Booths lasted for one week and involved pilgrimage. It was associated initially with the end of the year (Ex 34:22), when the agricultural work had been completed. The first day was marked by a symbolic cessation from all activity, after which burnt offerings were presented to the Lord. The eighth day was also one on which the congregation of Israel abstained from manual work and again offered burnt sacrifices. Leviticus 23:39-43 furnished details for the rituals that gave the festival its special name of booths or shelters or tabernacles. The fruit of “goodly trees” was to be gathered on the first day of the feast, along with palm fronds, willow branches, and boughs from trees in full leaf. From these, rough shelters or booths were to be constructed in which the people lived for the week of the feast. Every seventh year the observances were marked by a public recital of the covenant provisions to which the Israelites under Moses had committed themselves, a procedure designed to keep fresh in their minds the obligations as well as the blessings of the covenant relationship. A particularly significant observance of the Feast of Tabernacles took place in the time of Ezra, when the Judean community returned from Babylon—a celebration of a kind unknown for centuries (Neh 8:13-18). From the context it appears that observance of the feast had lapsed during the monarchy. The feast at Shiloh where Hannah was mistaken for a drunken woman and the feast referred to in Judges 21:19 were evidently the Feast of Booths. In a prophetic vision in which he saw all nations coming to Jerusalem to observe the Festival of Booths, Zechariah warned that those who did not continue this tradition could expect hardship and shortages of food (Zec 14:16-19).<\/p>\n<h5>Postexilic Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>There are a few minor festivals that were created in the period after the Jews returned from exile; some of these festivals had their origin in specific historical occasions.<\/p>\n<h6>The Festival of Purim<\/h6>\n<p>The Festival of Purim, also known as the Festival of Lots, was a joyful occasion occurring on the 14th day of the 12th month (Adar). It celebrated the way in which Esther and Mordecai were used by God to deliver his people in the Persian Empire from extermination by Haman (Est 9:21, 24-28). The feast was observed on the 14th day of Adar by those living in villages, and on the 15th by the inhabitants of walled towns and cities. The explanation of the name of the festival is given in Esther 9:24-26, and its observance reminded the Hebrews of God’s ability to save them during a time of anti-Semitic activity in Persia. The deliverance memorialized in this festival has consoled the Jews on other occasions when they have suffered persecution. Traditionally the scroll of Esther was read aloud in the synagogue on the evening before the feast, and there was a great outcry, especially among the children present, whenever the names of the hated Haman and his sons were mentioned.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of the Dedication of the Temple<\/h6>\n<p>Another joyous festival that lasted for eight days was the Feast of the Dedication of the Temple (1 Macc 4:52-59; 2 Macc 10:6-8), familiar to modern readers as Hanukkah, or the Festival of Lights. The specific dedication that prompted the feast occurred in 164 <span>BC<\/span>, when Judas Maccabeus reconsecrated the temple in Jerusalem after it had been defiled by Antiochus IV Epiphanes. The celebrations commenced on the 25th day of the ninth month (Kislev) and were marked at night by blazing lights and lanterns. The stories of brave opposition by the Maccabees to the crushing forces of paganism were recounted, and the feast was one of praise to God for his marvelous deliverance of the Jews during the Maccabean period.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentFestivals\">New Testament Festivals<\/p>\n<p>In Christ’s time the Sabbath was observed rigorously and was the occasion for synagogue worship (cf. Lk 4:16; Acts 13:14; 18:4). Pharisaic law prohibited all work, and Jesus came into conflict with the authorities periodically for breaches of the Sabbath regulations (cf. Mt 12:1-4; Mk 3:1-5; Lk 13:10-17). In the primitive church, worship occurred on “the first day of the week” (i.e., Sunday) to commemorate Christ’s resurrection. The early Christians initially participated in Jewish ceremonies (cf. Acts 20:16; 1 Cor 16:8). It was during the Feast of Pentecost, after Christ’s resurrection and ascension, that the Spirit was poured out (Acts 2:1-4), fulfilling Joel 2:28-32 and commencing the history of the Christian church as such.<\/p>\n<p>The Passover and Feast of Unleavened Bread were of great significance in the life of Christ (cf. Jn 4:45; 5:1; 6:4; 12:1-26), for the occasion was a very popular one in NT times (cf. 12:20). On the Passover, Pilate had instituted the custom of clemency to a prisoner nominated by the populace (Mt 27:15; Mk 15:6). Jesus participated actively in the Passover rituals (cf. Lk 2:42; Jn 2:13; 6:4). The Last Supper with his disciples occurred just prior to the Passover (Jn 13:1), when Judas Iscariot betrayed Jesus to the Pharisees (Lk 22:4-6). The breaking of bread and the drinking of wine at that Passover celebration (Mk 14:22-25) were related directly to Christ’s forthcoming death on the cross in a sacramental manner. Christ’s disciples were instructed to observe this rite as a memorial of his suffering and death for human sin (1 Cor 11:24-26) and as a proclamation of the power of the cross until the Lord returns in glory. Some scholars have suggested that Christ was actually hanging on the cross when the Passover lamb was being slaughtered, and if that chronology is correct, it would represent Jesus graphically as the “Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world” (Jn 1:29, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus was also present once when the Feast of Tabernacles was celebrated (7:10). In his day water was carried in procession from the pool of Siloam as an offering to God, and the ceremony most probably prompted Christ’s discourse on living water and eternal life (vv 37-39). On at least one occasion Jesus was in Jerusalem when the Festival of Lights occurred (Jn 10:22) and narrowly missed death by stoning.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was entertained occasionally at private feasts (cf. Lk 5:29), and once remedied an emergency situation when the wine ran out at a wedding ceremony (Jn 2:8-10). He was critical of the Pharisees for securing the chief seats at feasts (Mt 23:6; Mk 12:39; Lk 20:46) and taught that festivals ought to benefit the poor (Lk 14:13).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SymbolismofFeasts\">Symbolism of Feasts<\/p>\n<p>Many aspects of the ancient Hebrew feasts were interpreted symbolically in the early church. Paul regarded the earliest Hebrew Christians as the firstfruits of the Israel of God (Rom 11:16). In Romans 8:23, the Holy Spirit as possessed by Christians was regarded as only a token of what was to come, and as such was the firstfruit of the Spirit. Christians themselves were described in James 1:18 as the firstfruits of God’s creatures who were brought forth by the Word of Truth. The resurrection of Jesus was considered by Paul to be the firstfruits of those who slept (1 Cor 15:20, 23). In an allusion to OT festivals, Paul spoke of the Sabbaths, new moons, and feasts as merely being a shadow of good things to come (Col 2:16-17). The Passover was used figuratively to emphasize that Christ our Passover Lamb had been sacrificed for us. Believers were urged to keep the feast with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth, and not with the old leaven of malice and evil (1 Cor 5:7-8).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Calendars, Ancient and Modern; Offerings and Sacrifices; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FEASTS AND FESTIVALS OF ISRAEL Occasions of public or private rejoicing to commemorate some significant event or personage. The element of celebration has a special meaning in the cycle of religious occasions and the rites and ceremonies associated with these particular days. While the idea of a feast commonly implies a banquet with plenteous food and drink, this element is not indispensable. Sometimes there is only a token amount, as in the celebration of Holy Communion. In contemporary usag...","summary_en":"FEASTS AND FESTIVALS OF ISRAEL Occasions of public or private rejoicing to commemorate some significant event or personage. The element of celebration has a special meaning in the cycle of religious occasions and the rites and ceremonies associated with these particular days. While the idea of a feast commonly implies a banquet with plenteous food and drink, this element is not indispensable. Sometimes there is only a token amount, as in the celebration of Holy Communion. In contemporary usag...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19438,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jesus Christ","title_en":"Jesus Christ","content_ro":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","summary_en":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20189,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel of John","title_en":"Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>JOHN, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>The fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospels. (See discussion above on John, the Apostle.)<\/p>\n\n<p>The Gospel appears to have been written by one who knew the Jews and the Palestine of Jesus’ day well. He was familiar with Jewish messianic expectations (e.g., Jn 1:20-21; 4:25; 7:40-42; 12:34). He knew of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9) and the contempt the Pharisees had for “the people of the land” (7:49). He knew of the importance attached to the religious schools (v 15). He knew the way the Sabbath was observed and was aware of the provision that the obligation to circumcise on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath regulations (vv 22-23). Throughout the Gospel he moved with certainty in the vast range of Jewish ideas and customs.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same with topography. The writer mentioned many places, and his place-names all seem to be used correctly. He referred to Cana, a village not mentioned in any earlier literature known to us, which means that the reference almost certainly came from someone who actually knew the place. He located Bethany with some precision as about 15 stadia from Jerusalem (about 2 miles, or 3.2 kilometers, 11:18). He had several references to places in or near Jerusalem, such as Bethesda (5:2), Siloam (9:7), and the Kidron Valley (18:1). Of course, this does not rule out some contemporary of John’s, but it makes it difficult to think of the author as a much later individual writing at a distance from Palestine. The evidence as we have it indicates that the writer was a Jew in the Palestine of Jesus’ day.<\/p>\n<p>To many careful readers, it seems that the Gospel bears the stamp of an eyewitness. For example, Jesus was teaching “in the treasury” (8:20). Nothing is made of the point; the incident could easily have been told without it. It looks like a reminiscence of someone who sees the scene in his mind’s eye as he writes. The fact that the house was filled with fragrance when the woman broke the perfume jar (12:3) does not materially affect the account but is the kind of detail that one who was there would remember. The author noted that the loaves used in the feeding of the multitude were barley loaves (6:9) and that Jesus’ tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top to bottom (19:23). He told us that the branches with which Jesus was greeted were palm branches (12:13), and that it was night when Judas went out (13:30). Such touches are found throughout the Gospel, and it seems unjustified to treat them as no more than an attempt to create verisimilitude. They seem much more like indications that the author was writing about events in which he had himself taken part.<\/p>\n<p>The early church accepted Johannine authorship without question. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all see the apostle as the author. The first to quote this Gospel by name was Theophilus of Antioch, about <span>AD<\/span> 180.<\/p>\n<p>Those who object to Johannine authorship emphasize the differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics. The argument is that if Jesus was anything like the Christ portrayed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he could not be like the Christ of the fourth Gospel. This is a completely subjective argument, ignoring the fact that any great man will appear differently to different people. The judgment of the church throughout the centuries has been that Jesus was large enough to inspire both portraits. To put the same point another way, we have no reason for holding that the first three Evangelists tell us all there is to know about Jesus. There is no contradiction. John simply brings out other aspects of Jesus’ life and teachings.<\/p>\n<p>While we cannot prove beyond all doubt that John the apostle was the author, we can say that there is more reason for holding to this view than to any other.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>It has been usual for conservatives and liberals alike to date this writing in the last decade of the first century or early in the second. Some liberal scholars have put it well into the second century, but this is not common, and it is remarkable that there has been such a considerable measure of agreement.<\/p>\n<p>It is said that this Gospel is dependent on the Synoptics, which means that it must be dated sometime after them. But this argument has been widely abandoned in recent times. There is so much in John that is without parallel in the other three Gospels, and conversely so much in the other three that John might have used had he known it, that it is very difficult indeed to hold that this writer had any of the other Gospels before him when he wrote, or even that he had read them. Such resemblances as there are seem better explained by common use of oral tradition.<\/p>\n<p>It is also argued that there is a very developed theology in John and that we must allow time for its development. Granted, the theology of this Gospel is profound, but this does not require that we must wait for it until the end of the first century. The theology of the Letter to the Romans is also profound, and there is no reason for dating that writing later than the 50s. On the ground of development, then, there is no reason for putting John later than Romans. Development is a slippery argument at best, for it usually takes place at uneven rates, and we have no means of knowing how fast it took place in the area where the author lived.<\/p>\n<p>Other arguments for a late date are no more conclusive. For example, it is urged that the ecclesiastical system presupposed by the Gospel is too late for the time of the apostle John, and that the sacramental system of chapters 3 and 6 must have taken time to develop. But John does not mention any sacrament. It is true that many scholars think these chapters refer to baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but the fact is that John mentions neither.<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising in view of the way the traditional arguments have crumbled away that many in recent times are arguing that John must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70. If it were later, why does not John have some reference to it? Some of his language appears to be earlier. In 5:2 he says there “is” (not “was”) a pool called Bethesda. And he often refers to the Twelve as Jesus’ disciples, or “his” disciples, or the like. In later times Christians usually said “the” disciples, for they saw no need to say whose the disciples were. But in the early days, when Christians were in contact with rabbis (each of whom had his disciples), it was important to show that Jesus’ disciples were in mind. It is important also that John makes no reference to any of the synoptic Gospels. The simplest explanation is that he had not seen them. They were not yet widely circulated.<\/p>\n<p>None of this enables us to date this Gospel with precision. But the weight of evidence points to an early date (before <span>AD<\/span> 70).<\/p>\n<p>The author was John the apostle, a Jew. However, the writing gives evidence of contact with Greek thought, for example, in the reference to Christ as “the Word” in chapter 1 and the translation of words like “rabbi” (1:38). It is almost universally held that such considerations compel us to see the work as originating in a center of Greek culture, and Ephesus has traditionally been favored. Before the end of the second century we have Irenaeus writing that John published the Gospel during his residence at Ephesus.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to similarities between John and the Odes of Solomon, which they think came from Syria. As there are also some resemblances in the language of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, this is held to show that John was written in Syria, probably at Antioch. Others again think that Egypt was the place, and they support this by pointing out that the oldest fragment of a manuscript of this Gospel was found there. There is no real evidence, and we are left with probabilities. There is much to be said for accepting the evidence of Irenaeus and seeing Ephesus as the place of origin, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>There is no real indication of the intended destination. From 20:31 we learn that the book was written that the readers might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and that by believing they might have life. The Gospel, then, has an evangelistic aim. But it is also possible that “believe” means “keep on believing”—“go on in faith,” rather than “begin to believe.” That is to say, the book may have been meant from the beginning to build people up in the faith. Probably we should not distinguish between these aims too sharply. Both may well be in mind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Several possible backgrounds to the Gospel have been suggested. The Greek interest is obvious, and this writing has sometimes been called the Gospel of the Hellenists. The suggestion is that we should look to Greek writings, perhaps the works of the philosophers or Philo of Alexandria, to find the right background against which to understand what John has written. This approach may be seen in the work of Rudolf Bultmann, who thought specifically of Gnosticism. Indeed, for Bultmann one of the sources of this Gospel was a discourse source that he thought was taken from non-Christian Gnosticism. Not many have been prepared to follow Bultmann, but a number of recent commentators have discerned some form of Gnosticism as the backdrop to John.<\/p>\n<p>While such views are put forward seriously, there are some substantial objections. One is that, despite the confident assertions of some scholars, Gnosticism has never been shown to be earlier than Christianity. In the form in which it comes before us in history, it is a Christian heresy, and of course, the Christian faith must appear before a Christian heresy is possible. Another objection is that there is a basic difference between the two systems. Gnosticism is concerned with knowledge (the very word is derived from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>,<\/em> “knowledge”). Its “redeemer” is one who comes from heaven with knowledge. But John does not subscribe to the view that man is saved by knowledge. The Redeemer comes to take away the sin of the world (1:29). Gnosticism tells people that life is an upward struggle; Christianity tells of a Savior who came down to raise them up. It is not easy to see any form of Gnosticism as the essential background to Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Much more significant is John’s Semitic background. Especially important here is the OT, accepted as sacred Scripture by Jew and Christian alike. It lies constantly behind John’s statements, and it must be studied carefully if John is to be understood. It is plain that John knew and loved the Septuagint, the translation into Greek of the Hebrew OT. Again and again, the Septuagint can be shown to lie behind what John says.<\/p>\n<p>In modern times important discoveries have been made at Qumran, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. Among the scrolls unearthed in the caves of this area are several that have affinities with John. Indeed, one of the interesting facts about the scrolls is that they have more parallels with John than with any other part of the NT, a fact difficult to explain if John was written late and at a distance from Palestine. The resemblances to the Qumran writings must be viewed with care, for there is often a linguistic resemblance where the thinking is quite different. For example, both use the unusual expression “the Spirit of truth.” But where John means one of the persons of the Trinity, the scrolls speak of “a spirit of truth” and “a spirit of error” striving in the souls of people. The connection is real, but John is clearly not dependent on the scrolls for his thinking. The contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they afford additional evidence that this Gospel is basically Palestinian and must be understood against a background of first-century Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Other backgrounds have been suggested, such as the Hermetic literature. This is a group of writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus (“Hermes Thrice-greatest”), a designation of the Egyptian god Thoth. There are indeed some points of contact with John, but they are few in comparison with those of writings rooted in Palestine. It is difficult to take such suggestions seriously. John is essentially Palestinian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The writer told us that Jesus did many “signs” (or miracles) that he had not recorded, but “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life” (Jn 20:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). John wrote to show that Jesus is the Messiah. But he did not do this simply with a view to conveying interesting information. He wanted his readers to see this knowledge as a challenge to faith; when they believe, they will have life. John sought to bring men and women to Christ; he had an evangelistic aim. That does not exhaust what he was trying to do, for his words have meaning for believers. It is important that believers have a right knowledge of Jesus and that they continue to believe.<\/p>\n<p>The main theological teaching of this Gospel, then, is that God has sent his Messiah, Jesus. He is the very Son of God, and he comes to bring life (3:16). Though Jesus told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, this is not often said so specifically. The avoidance of the term might well be because of the political overtones it had acquired among the Jews at large. They looked for a Messiah who would fight the Romans. He would defeat them and set up a mighty world empire with its capital in Jerusalem. Jesus was not aiming at anything like that, and it was important that he avoid the kind of language that would give that impression. But though the conventional messianic terminology is avoided, John left no doubt that Jesus was God’s chosen one. Again and again he depicted Jesus as fulfilling messianic functions. For example, in the long discourse in chapter 6 we see Jesus as the bread from heaven, fulfilling the expectation that when Messiah came, he would renew the manna; and in the giving of sight to the blind man (ch 9) we have another messianic function (cf. Is 35:5).<\/p>\n<p>With this greatness of Jesus, John also combined teaching about his lowliness. A continuing, though unobtrusive, strand of Johannine teaching is that Jesus depends on the Father for everything. Apart from the Father, Jesus said, he could do nothing (Jn 5:30). His very food is to do the Father’s will (4:34). He lives through the Father (6:57). It is the Father who gives him his disciples (6:37, 44; 17:6). It is the Father who bears witness to him (5:32, 37). John insists that Jesus is in no sense independent of the Father. In the mission of Jesus, John sees the working out of the purpose of the Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue and Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>John begins with a prologue (1:1-18) that is unlike anything in any of the other Gospels. In it he refers to Jesus as “the Word,” a term that has points of contact with both Greek and Hebrew thinking. As John uses it, it conveys the thought that Jesus is the expression of the mind of the Father. John speaks of the Word as God (1:1), sees him as active in creation (1:3-5), goes on to the witness borne to him by John the Baptist (1:6-8), speaks of the coming of the Word into the world (1:9-14), and finishes with a section on the greatness of the Word (1:15-18). In this prologue he briefly introduces some of the great themes that will be developed throughout the Gospel. It is a majestic introduction to the whole.<\/p>\n<p>Next we have the beginnings of Jesus’ public ministry (1:19-51). Jesus’ work was preceded by that of John the Baptist, and the Evangelist tells us first about the kind of witness that the Baptist gave to Jesus. Witness is one of his important concepts, and witness is all that John the Baptist does in this Gospel. From this witness we move to the way the first disciples came to Jesus. We learn something of how Andrew and Peter came to know the Lord. We read also of Philip and Nathanael, of whom we learn little or nothing in the other Gospels.<\/p>\n<h5>The Signs and Discourses (2:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The public ministry of Jesus is described in a very distinctive way in this Gospel. John has a long section (chs 2–12) in which he tells of a number of miracles Jesus did, interweaving into his account a series of discourses. Sometimes these are addresses given to groups of people, and sometimes they are talks with individuals. Some scholars call this section of the Gospel the Book of Signs, thus emphasizing the prominent place given to seven miracles. For John they are not simply wonders. They are meaningful; in the literal sense of the term they are <em>sign<\/em>ificant.<\/p>\n<p>The first of them is the turning of the water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee (2:1-11). The water in question is connected with Jewish rites of purification (v 6), and the story is surely to teach us that Jesus transforms life. He changes the water of the law into the wine of the gospel. As a result of this “sign,” his disciples believed in him (v 11). John went on to tell how Jesus went up to Jerusalem and drove the traders out of the temple. They were selling animals for sacrifice and changing money. But their business was being done in the Court of the Gentiles, the only place in the temple where a Gentile could come to meditate and pray.<\/p>\n<p>The first discourse is on the new birth (3:1-21). Jesus talked with Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, about the necessity for radical renewal if one is to enter the kingdom. Jesus was speaking of God’s regenerating activity, not some human reformation. Following this, John records a dispute between some of John’s disciples with a Jew on the subject of purification. This opens the way for a section that shows the superiority of Jesus over John the Baptist—by the Baptist’s own confession (3:22-36).<\/p>\n<p>The second discourse is really a long conversation Jesus had with the woman of Samaria, whom he met by a well (4:1-42). It turns on “the water of life,” a term that is not fully explained in this chapter but which we later find points to the life-giving Spirit (7:38-39). This leads to the story of the second sign, the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54), notable for the fact that Jesus healed at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>The third sign is the healing of the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (5:1-18). This man had spent many years waiting for healing at the moving of the water. Jesus told him to get up and walk, and he did. Because it was done on a Sabbath, the Pharisees objected. This leads to Jesus’ third discourse, that on the divine Son (5:19-47). Here the closeness of the relationship of Jesus to the Father is stressed, and his place in the judgment is brought out. There is emphasis also on the variety of witness who encountered Jesus, which shows how reasonable it is to accept him as God’s own Son.<\/p>\n<p>John’s fourth sign is the one miracle (apart from the resurrection) found in all four Gospels: the feeding of the 5,000 (6:1-15). It is followed by Jesus’ walking on water (vv 16-21), which seems to be meant as the fifth sign (though some scholars think not; if they are right, there are only six signs). Then comes the fourth discourse, the great sermon on the bread of life (vv 22-59). Jesus is this bread, which he gives to all men and women who believe in him. There are references to eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv 50-58), which point to his death. Some have seen in them a reference to Communion, but it is hard to see why Jesus should refer in this way to an as-yet-nonexistent sacrament. Moreover, much the same effect is attributed in the same discourse to believing (vv 35, 47). It seems best to understand Jesus as meaning that people must believe in him as the one who would die for them in order for them to have life.<\/p>\n<p>There is a section detailing Peter’s affirmation of loyalty in the face of some who drifted away from the Master (6:67-71). Then we come to the fifth discourse, on the life-giving Spirit (7:1-52). John has an important explanatory point of his own when he tells us that at the time the Spirit had not been given because Jesus had not yet been glorified (v 39). The fullness of the Spirit depends on the completion of the work of Christ in his death and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The sixth discourse tells of the light of the world (8:12-59). This aspect of Jesus’ person and ministry is dramatically brought out in the sixth sign, the healing of the man born blind (ch 9). It is a lively narrative, as the healed man conducts a spirited defense against the Pharisees who belittled Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most beautiful of all the illustrations of Jesus’ relations to his people is that on which he dwells in the seventh discourse, where he speaks of himself as the good shepherd (ch 10). There is the obvious truth that sheep depend entirely on their shepherd, but Jesus says something else. Whereas earthly shepherds live to meet the needs of their sheep, Jesus laid down his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The final sign is the raising of Lazarus (11:1-44), a man who had been dead for four days. The story graphically brings out Jesus’ power over death and his readiness to confer the gift of life. Jesus speaks of himself as “the resurrection and the life” (v 25); death cannot defeat him. He brings life to the dead, to the spiritually dead as well as to physically dead Lazarus. John goes on to note the reaction to this miracle: some believed, but some opposed Jesus (vv 45-57). He includes a notable saying of Caiaphas, the high priest, that one man should die for the people (vv 50-52). Caiaphas was speaking as a cynical politician (better one dead, however innocent, than the whole nation be troubled). But John saw in the words the deeper meaning that Jesus’ death would bring salvation to many.<\/p>\n<p>John rounds off his account of the ministry with the story of the anointing of Jesus by a woman in Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the coming of some Greeks to Jesus, and his final summary of what he had taught (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Last Supper<\/h5>\n<p>The account of what went on in the upper room on the night before the Crucifixion is the fullest of all the four Gospels. Curiously, John says nothing about the institution of Communion, a fact that has never been satisfactorily explained. But he tells us how Jesus washed the feet of the disciples (13:1-17), an action splendidly exemplifying the spirit of lowly service so soon to be shown on the cross. Then comes the prophecy of the betrayal, an action that set in motion the events that would lead to the cross (vv 18-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the long discourse that follows, Jesus dealt with some questions posed by his followers and went on to teach them some important truths, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). He develops the thought that he is the true vine, the disciples being vitally joined to him as branches to the vine. It is important for the branches to remain in the vine if they are to have life (15:1-16). Then come some words about suffering that would be of help to them in times of persecution (vv 17-25). Jesus goes on to speak about the Holy Spirit (15:26–16:15). This is a very important passage, for it contains much more about the Spirit than we find elsewhere in Jesus’ words. Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete,” a title not easy to understand. It is in origin a legal term, and at least we can say that it indicates that the Spirit brings friendship, encouragement, and help. Jesus went on to speak of his approaching departure from the disciples and to prepare them for the trying time ahead (16:16-33). This part of the Gospel concludes with Jesus’ great High Priestly prayer. He prayed for the disciples to be one, as he commended them to the care of the heavenly Father (ch 17).<\/p>\n<h5>The Cross and Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, he went forward to meet them and they fell to the ground (18:1-11). He gave himself over to them; they did not take him over. At the outset of his passion narrative, John was making the point that Jesus is sovereign. He was not being defeated by the march of events but was sovereignly doing the will of the Father. John is the only one to tell us that Jesus was taken before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, the reigning high priest (18:12-14, 19-24). He tells also of Peter’s three denials of Jesus (vv 15-27). He did not spend much time on the Jewish trial, but he was much more explicit than the other Evangelists in his account of the Roman trial. Clearly, he had some special knowledge of what went on before Pilate. He presents a magnificent picture of Jesus talking with Pilate about kingship—the Son of God discussing with the representative of Caesar the meaning of sovereignty (vv 33-40).<\/p>\n<p>In his account of the Crucifixion John has a number of touches of his own, notably the way Jesus commended Mary to the care of the beloved disciple (19:26-27), the fact that the cry Jesus uttered as he died was “It is finished” (v 30), and the piercing of his side by a soldier’s spear (vv 31-37).<\/p>\n<p>John proceeds to the narrative of the burial (vv 38-42) and of the empty tomb (20:1-10). He speaks of appearances of the risen Lord to Mary Magdalene (vv 11-18), and to the disciples—both without (vv 19-23) and with Thomas (vv 24-29).<\/p>\n<p>The final chapter, an epilogue, tells of a miraculous catch of fish (21:1-14) and goes on to the moving account of Peter’s threefold declaration of love to Jesus and his restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOHN, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>The fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospels. (See discussion above on John, the Apostle.)<\/p>\n\n<p>The Gospel appears to have been written by one who knew the Jews and the Palestine of Jesus’ day well. He was familiar with Jewish messianic expectations (e.g., Jn 1:20-21; 4:25; 7:40-42; 12:34). He knew of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9) and the contempt the Pharisees had for “the people of the land” (7:49). He knew of the importance attached to the religious schools (v 15). He knew the way the Sabbath was observed and was aware of the provision that the obligation to circumcise on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath regulations (vv 22-23). Throughout the Gospel he moved with certainty in the vast range of Jewish ideas and customs.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same with topography. The writer mentioned many places, and his place-names all seem to be used correctly. He referred to Cana, a village not mentioned in any earlier literature known to us, which means that the reference almost certainly came from someone who actually knew the place. He located Bethany with some precision as about 15 stadia from Jerusalem (about 2 miles, or 3.2 kilometers, 11:18). He had several references to places in or near Jerusalem, such as Bethesda (5:2), Siloam (9:7), and the Kidron Valley (18:1). Of course, this does not rule out some contemporary of John’s, but it makes it difficult to think of the author as a much later individual writing at a distance from Palestine. The evidence as we have it indicates that the writer was a Jew in the Palestine of Jesus’ day.<\/p>\n<p>To many careful readers, it seems that the Gospel bears the stamp of an eyewitness. For example, Jesus was teaching “in the treasury” (8:20). Nothing is made of the point; the incident could easily have been told without it. It looks like a reminiscence of someone who sees the scene in his mind’s eye as he writes. The fact that the house was filled with fragrance when the woman broke the perfume jar (12:3) does not materially affect the account but is the kind of detail that one who was there would remember. The author noted that the loaves used in the feeding of the multitude were barley loaves (6:9) and that Jesus’ tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top to bottom (19:23). He told us that the branches with which Jesus was greeted were palm branches (12:13), and that it was night when Judas went out (13:30). Such touches are found throughout the Gospel, and it seems unjustified to treat them as no more than an attempt to create verisimilitude. They seem much more like indications that the author was writing about events in which he had himself taken part.<\/p>\n<p>The early church accepted Johannine authorship without question. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all see the apostle as the author. The first to quote this Gospel by name was Theophilus of Antioch, about <span>AD<\/span> 180.<\/p>\n<p>Those who object to Johannine authorship emphasize the differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics. The argument is that if Jesus was anything like the Christ portrayed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he could not be like the Christ of the fourth Gospel. This is a completely subjective argument, ignoring the fact that any great man will appear differently to different people. The judgment of the church throughout the centuries has been that Jesus was large enough to inspire both portraits. To put the same point another way, we have no reason for holding that the first three Evangelists tell us all there is to know about Jesus. There is no contradiction. John simply brings out other aspects of Jesus’ life and teachings.<\/p>\n<p>While we cannot prove beyond all doubt that John the apostle was the author, we can say that there is more reason for holding to this view than to any other.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>It has been usual for conservatives and liberals alike to date this writing in the last decade of the first century or early in the second. Some liberal scholars have put it well into the second century, but this is not common, and it is remarkable that there has been such a considerable measure of agreement.<\/p>\n<p>It is said that this Gospel is dependent on the Synoptics, which means that it must be dated sometime after them. But this argument has been widely abandoned in recent times. There is so much in John that is without parallel in the other three Gospels, and conversely so much in the other three that John might have used had he known it, that it is very difficult indeed to hold that this writer had any of the other Gospels before him when he wrote, or even that he had read them. Such resemblances as there are seem better explained by common use of oral tradition.<\/p>\n<p>It is also argued that there is a very developed theology in John and that we must allow time for its development. Granted, the theology of this Gospel is profound, but this does not require that we must wait for it until the end of the first century. The theology of the Letter to the Romans is also profound, and there is no reason for dating that writing later than the 50s. On the ground of development, then, there is no reason for putting John later than Romans. Development is a slippery argument at best, for it usually takes place at uneven rates, and we have no means of knowing how fast it took place in the area where the author lived.<\/p>\n<p>Other arguments for a late date are no more conclusive. For example, it is urged that the ecclesiastical system presupposed by the Gospel is too late for the time of the apostle John, and that the sacramental system of chapters 3 and 6 must have taken time to develop. But John does not mention any sacrament. It is true that many scholars think these chapters refer to baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but the fact is that John mentions neither.<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising in view of the way the traditional arguments have crumbled away that many in recent times are arguing that John must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70. If it were later, why does not John have some reference to it? Some of his language appears to be earlier. In 5:2 he says there “is” (not “was”) a pool called Bethesda. And he often refers to the Twelve as Jesus’ disciples, or “his” disciples, or the like. In later times Christians usually said “the” disciples, for they saw no need to say whose the disciples were. But in the early days, when Christians were in contact with rabbis (each of whom had his disciples), it was important to show that Jesus’ disciples were in mind. It is important also that John makes no reference to any of the synoptic Gospels. The simplest explanation is that he had not seen them. They were not yet widely circulated.<\/p>\n<p>None of this enables us to date this Gospel with precision. But the weight of evidence points to an early date (before <span>AD<\/span> 70).<\/p>\n<p>The author was John the apostle, a Jew. However, the writing gives evidence of contact with Greek thought, for example, in the reference to Christ as “the Word” in chapter 1 and the translation of words like “rabbi” (1:38). It is almost universally held that such considerations compel us to see the work as originating in a center of Greek culture, and Ephesus has traditionally been favored. Before the end of the second century we have Irenaeus writing that John published the Gospel during his residence at Ephesus.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to similarities between John and the Odes of Solomon, which they think came from Syria. As there are also some resemblances in the language of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, this is held to show that John was written in Syria, probably at Antioch. Others again think that Egypt was the place, and they support this by pointing out that the oldest fragment of a manuscript of this Gospel was found there. There is no real evidence, and we are left with probabilities. There is much to be said for accepting the evidence of Irenaeus and seeing Ephesus as the place of origin, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>There is no real indication of the intended destination. From 20:31 we learn that the book was written that the readers might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and that by believing they might have life. The Gospel, then, has an evangelistic aim. But it is also possible that “believe” means “keep on believing”—“go on in faith,” rather than “begin to believe.” That is to say, the book may have been meant from the beginning to build people up in the faith. Probably we should not distinguish between these aims too sharply. Both may well be in mind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Several possible backgrounds to the Gospel have been suggested. The Greek interest is obvious, and this writing has sometimes been called the Gospel of the Hellenists. The suggestion is that we should look to Greek writings, perhaps the works of the philosophers or Philo of Alexandria, to find the right background against which to understand what John has written. This approach may be seen in the work of Rudolf Bultmann, who thought specifically of Gnosticism. Indeed, for Bultmann one of the sources of this Gospel was a discourse source that he thought was taken from non-Christian Gnosticism. Not many have been prepared to follow Bultmann, but a number of recent commentators have discerned some form of Gnosticism as the backdrop to John.<\/p>\n<p>While such views are put forward seriously, there are some substantial objections. One is that, despite the confident assertions of some scholars, Gnosticism has never been shown to be earlier than Christianity. In the form in which it comes before us in history, it is a Christian heresy, and of course, the Christian faith must appear before a Christian heresy is possible. Another objection is that there is a basic difference between the two systems. Gnosticism is concerned with knowledge (the very word is derived from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>,<\/em> “knowledge”). Its “redeemer” is one who comes from heaven with knowledge. But John does not subscribe to the view that man is saved by knowledge. The Redeemer comes to take away the sin of the world (1:29). Gnosticism tells people that life is an upward struggle; Christianity tells of a Savior who came down to raise them up. It is not easy to see any form of Gnosticism as the essential background to Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Much more significant is John’s Semitic background. Especially important here is the OT, accepted as sacred Scripture by Jew and Christian alike. It lies constantly behind John’s statements, and it must be studied carefully if John is to be understood. It is plain that John knew and loved the Septuagint, the translation into Greek of the Hebrew OT. Again and again, the Septuagint can be shown to lie behind what John says.<\/p>\n<p>In modern times important discoveries have been made at Qumran, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. Among the scrolls unearthed in the caves of this area are several that have affinities with John. Indeed, one of the interesting facts about the scrolls is that they have more parallels with John than with any other part of the NT, a fact difficult to explain if John was written late and at a distance from Palestine. The resemblances to the Qumran writings must be viewed with care, for there is often a linguistic resemblance where the thinking is quite different. For example, both use the unusual expression “the Spirit of truth.” But where John means one of the persons of the Trinity, the scrolls speak of “a spirit of truth” and “a spirit of error” striving in the souls of people. The connection is real, but John is clearly not dependent on the scrolls for his thinking. The contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they afford additional evidence that this Gospel is basically Palestinian and must be understood against a background of first-century Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Other backgrounds have been suggested, such as the Hermetic literature. This is a group of writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus (“Hermes Thrice-greatest”), a designation of the Egyptian god Thoth. There are indeed some points of contact with John, but they are few in comparison with those of writings rooted in Palestine. It is difficult to take such suggestions seriously. John is essentially Palestinian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The writer told us that Jesus did many “signs” (or miracles) that he had not recorded, but “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life” (Jn 20:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). John wrote to show that Jesus is the Messiah. But he did not do this simply with a view to conveying interesting information. He wanted his readers to see this knowledge as a challenge to faith; when they believe, they will have life. John sought to bring men and women to Christ; he had an evangelistic aim. That does not exhaust what he was trying to do, for his words have meaning for believers. It is important that believers have a right knowledge of Jesus and that they continue to believe.<\/p>\n<p>The main theological teaching of this Gospel, then, is that God has sent his Messiah, Jesus. He is the very Son of God, and he comes to bring life (3:16). Though Jesus told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, this is not often said so specifically. The avoidance of the term might well be because of the political overtones it had acquired among the Jews at large. They looked for a Messiah who would fight the Romans. He would defeat them and set up a mighty world empire with its capital in Jerusalem. Jesus was not aiming at anything like that, and it was important that he avoid the kind of language that would give that impression. But though the conventional messianic terminology is avoided, John left no doubt that Jesus was God’s chosen one. Again and again he depicted Jesus as fulfilling messianic functions. For example, in the long discourse in chapter 6 we see Jesus as the bread from heaven, fulfilling the expectation that when Messiah came, he would renew the manna; and in the giving of sight to the blind man (ch 9) we have another messianic function (cf. Is 35:5).<\/p>\n<p>With this greatness of Jesus, John also combined teaching about his lowliness. A continuing, though unobtrusive, strand of Johannine teaching is that Jesus depends on the Father for everything. Apart from the Father, Jesus said, he could do nothing (Jn 5:30). His very food is to do the Father’s will (4:34). He lives through the Father (6:57). It is the Father who gives him his disciples (6:37, 44; 17:6). It is the Father who bears witness to him (5:32, 37). John insists that Jesus is in no sense independent of the Father. In the mission of Jesus, John sees the working out of the purpose of the Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue and Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>John begins with a prologue (1:1-18) that is unlike anything in any of the other Gospels. In it he refers to Jesus as “the Word,” a term that has points of contact with both Greek and Hebrew thinking. As John uses it, it conveys the thought that Jesus is the expression of the mind of the Father. John speaks of the Word as God (1:1), sees him as active in creation (1:3-5), goes on to the witness borne to him by John the Baptist (1:6-8), speaks of the coming of the Word into the world (1:9-14), and finishes with a section on the greatness of the Word (1:15-18). In this prologue he briefly introduces some of the great themes that will be developed throughout the Gospel. It is a majestic introduction to the whole.<\/p>\n<p>Next we have the beginnings of Jesus’ public ministry (1:19-51). Jesus’ work was preceded by that of John the Baptist, and the Evangelist tells us first about the kind of witness that the Baptist gave to Jesus. Witness is one of his important concepts, and witness is all that John the Baptist does in this Gospel. From this witness we move to the way the first disciples came to Jesus. We learn something of how Andrew and Peter came to know the Lord. We read also of Philip and Nathanael, of whom we learn little or nothing in the other Gospels.<\/p>\n<h5>The Signs and Discourses (2:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The public ministry of Jesus is described in a very distinctive way in this Gospel. John has a long section (chs 2–12) in which he tells of a number of miracles Jesus did, interweaving into his account a series of discourses. Sometimes these are addresses given to groups of people, and sometimes they are talks with individuals. Some scholars call this section of the Gospel the Book of Signs, thus emphasizing the prominent place given to seven miracles. For John they are not simply wonders. They are meaningful; in the literal sense of the term they are <em>sign<\/em>ificant.<\/p>\n<p>The first of them is the turning of the water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee (2:1-11). The water in question is connected with Jewish rites of purification (v 6), and the story is surely to teach us that Jesus transforms life. He changes the water of the law into the wine of the gospel. As a result of this “sign,” his disciples believed in him (v 11). John went on to tell how Jesus went up to Jerusalem and drove the traders out of the temple. They were selling animals for sacrifice and changing money. But their business was being done in the Court of the Gentiles, the only place in the temple where a Gentile could come to meditate and pray.<\/p>\n<p>The first discourse is on the new birth (3:1-21). Jesus talked with Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, about the necessity for radical renewal if one is to enter the kingdom. Jesus was speaking of God’s regenerating activity, not some human reformation. Following this, John records a dispute between some of John’s disciples with a Jew on the subject of purification. This opens the way for a section that shows the superiority of Jesus over John the Baptist—by the Baptist’s own confession (3:22-36).<\/p>\n<p>The second discourse is really a long conversation Jesus had with the woman of Samaria, whom he met by a well (4:1-42). It turns on “the water of life,” a term that is not fully explained in this chapter but which we later find points to the life-giving Spirit (7:38-39). This leads to the story of the second sign, the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54), notable for the fact that Jesus healed at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>The third sign is the healing of the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (5:1-18). This man had spent many years waiting for healing at the moving of the water. Jesus told him to get up and walk, and he did. Because it was done on a Sabbath, the Pharisees objected. This leads to Jesus’ third discourse, that on the divine Son (5:19-47). Here the closeness of the relationship of Jesus to the Father is stressed, and his place in the judgment is brought out. There is emphasis also on the variety of witness who encountered Jesus, which shows how reasonable it is to accept him as God’s own Son.<\/p>\n<p>John’s fourth sign is the one miracle (apart from the resurrection) found in all four Gospels: the feeding of the 5,000 (6:1-15). It is followed by Jesus’ walking on water (vv 16-21), which seems to be meant as the fifth sign (though some scholars think not; if they are right, there are only six signs). Then comes the fourth discourse, the great sermon on the bread of life (vv 22-59). Jesus is this bread, which he gives to all men and women who believe in him. There are references to eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv 50-58), which point to his death. Some have seen in them a reference to Communion, but it is hard to see why Jesus should refer in this way to an as-yet-nonexistent sacrament. Moreover, much the same effect is attributed in the same discourse to believing (vv 35, 47). It seems best to understand Jesus as meaning that people must believe in him as the one who would die for them in order for them to have life.<\/p>\n<p>There is a section detailing Peter’s affirmation of loyalty in the face of some who drifted away from the Master (6:67-71). Then we come to the fifth discourse, on the life-giving Spirit (7:1-52). John has an important explanatory point of his own when he tells us that at the time the Spirit had not been given because Jesus had not yet been glorified (v 39). The fullness of the Spirit depends on the completion of the work of Christ in his death and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The sixth discourse tells of the light of the world (8:12-59). This aspect of Jesus’ person and ministry is dramatically brought out in the sixth sign, the healing of the man born blind (ch 9). It is a lively narrative, as the healed man conducts a spirited defense against the Pharisees who belittled Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most beautiful of all the illustrations of Jesus’ relations to his people is that on which he dwells in the seventh discourse, where he speaks of himself as the good shepherd (ch 10). There is the obvious truth that sheep depend entirely on their shepherd, but Jesus says something else. Whereas earthly shepherds live to meet the needs of their sheep, Jesus laid down his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The final sign is the raising of Lazarus (11:1-44), a man who had been dead for four days. The story graphically brings out Jesus’ power over death and his readiness to confer the gift of life. Jesus speaks of himself as “the resurrection and the life” (v 25); death cannot defeat him. He brings life to the dead, to the spiritually dead as well as to physically dead Lazarus. John goes on to note the reaction to this miracle: some believed, but some opposed Jesus (vv 45-57). He includes a notable saying of Caiaphas, the high priest, that one man should die for the people (vv 50-52). Caiaphas was speaking as a cynical politician (better one dead, however innocent, than the whole nation be troubled). But John saw in the words the deeper meaning that Jesus’ death would bring salvation to many.<\/p>\n<p>John rounds off his account of the ministry with the story of the anointing of Jesus by a woman in Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the coming of some Greeks to Jesus, and his final summary of what he had taught (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Last Supper<\/h5>\n<p>The account of what went on in the upper room on the night before the Crucifixion is the fullest of all the four Gospels. Curiously, John says nothing about the institution of Communion, a fact that has never been satisfactorily explained. But he tells us how Jesus washed the feet of the disciples (13:1-17), an action splendidly exemplifying the spirit of lowly service so soon to be shown on the cross. Then comes the prophecy of the betrayal, an action that set in motion the events that would lead to the cross (vv 18-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the long discourse that follows, Jesus dealt with some questions posed by his followers and went on to teach them some important truths, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). He develops the thought that he is the true vine, the disciples being vitally joined to him as branches to the vine. It is important for the branches to remain in the vine if they are to have life (15:1-16). Then come some words about suffering that would be of help to them in times of persecution (vv 17-25). Jesus goes on to speak about the Holy Spirit (15:26–16:15). This is a very important passage, for it contains much more about the Spirit than we find elsewhere in Jesus’ words. Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete,” a title not easy to understand. It is in origin a legal term, and at least we can say that it indicates that the Spirit brings friendship, encouragement, and help. Jesus went on to speak of his approaching departure from the disciples and to prepare them for the trying time ahead (16:16-33). This part of the Gospel concludes with Jesus’ great High Priestly prayer. He prayed for the disciples to be one, as he commended them to the care of the heavenly Father (ch 17).<\/p>\n<h5>The Cross and Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, he went forward to meet them and they fell to the ground (18:1-11). He gave himself over to them; they did not take him over. At the outset of his passion narrative, John was making the point that Jesus is sovereign. He was not being defeated by the march of events but was sovereignly doing the will of the Father. John is the only one to tell us that Jesus was taken before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, the reigning high priest (18:12-14, 19-24). He tells also of Peter’s three denials of Jesus (vv 15-27). He did not spend much time on the Jewish trial, but he was much more explicit than the other Evangelists in his account of the Roman trial. Clearly, he had some special knowledge of what went on before Pilate. He presents a magnificent picture of Jesus talking with Pilate about kingship—the Son of God discussing with the representative of Caesar the meaning of sovereignty (vv 33-40).<\/p>\n<p>In his account of the Crucifixion John has a number of touches of his own, notably the way Jesus commended Mary to the care of the beloved disciple (19:26-27), the fact that the cry Jesus uttered as he died was “It is finished” (v 30), and the piercing of his side by a soldier’s spear (vv 31-37).<\/p>\n<p>John proceeds to the narrative of the burial (vv 38-42) and of the empty tomb (20:1-10). He speaks of appearances of the risen Lord to Mary Magdalene (vv 11-18), and to the disciples—both without (vv 19-23) and with Thomas (vv 24-29).<\/p>\n<p>The final chapter, an epilogue, tells of a miraculous catch of fish (21:1-14) and goes on to the moving account of Peter’s threefold declaration of love to Jesus and his restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOHN, Gospel of The fourth Gospel. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospe...","summary_en":"JOHN, Gospel of The fourth Gospel. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospe...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20382,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>JOHN THE BAPTIST<\/h3>\n<p>Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29, while Jesus was still ministering.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>• Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>• John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>• Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>• The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BirthInfancyandBoyhood\">Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s Gospel is our only source of information concerning the birth and boyhood of John. The Gospel writer states that John was born in the hill country of Judah (Lk 1:39) of priestly descent, being the son of Zechariah, a priest of the order of Abijah, and Elizabeth, a descendant of Aaron (v 5). Both parents were righteous in the sight of God, following all the commandments closely (v 6). Like the birth of Jesus, only to a much lesser degree, the birth of John the Baptist is described in Luke as extraordinary. The angel Gabriel announced the coming birth to Zechariah in the temple; to the older, barren Elizabeth it came as an answer to prayer (vv 8-13). John’s name is announced to Zechariah by the angel, even as his purpose as forerunner is revealed before birth (vv 13-17). Such a consecration from birth is reminiscent of the call of the OT prophet Jeremiah (cf. Jer 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>There existed some familial relationship between the families of John and Jesus. Elizabeth is described as a relative of Mary (Lk 1:36), which may connote cousin or aunt, or may only mean being from the same tribe.<\/p>\n<p>John’s childhood, as that of Jesus, is left quite vague in the Gospel account. All that is said is that “John grew up and became strong in spirit. Then he lived out in the wilderness until he began his public ministry to Israel” (Lk 1:80, <span>nlt<\/span>). Some scholars have suggested that John might have been adopted as a boy by the Essenes (as was their practice) at Qumran and reared in their wilderness community, adjacent to the Dead Sea and near the Jordan River. There are some similarities between the activities of the Qumran sect, known through the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the later ministry of John the Baptist. Both practiced a type of asceticism and removed themselves from the life of Jerusalem. Both practiced baptism and associated this rite with initiation and repentance. Finally, John and the Qumran group were both eschatologically minded, awaiting God’s final end-time activity in history. Nevertheless, many significant differences exist between John and the Qumran sect.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AppearanceandIdentity\">Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>Mark’s Gospel begins with an account of John the Baptist’s appearance: “John the Baptist . . . lived in the wilderness and was preaching that people should be baptized to show that they had turned from their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Mk 1:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). A rich OT background lies behind John’s association with the wilderness, in this case the wilderness of Judea. It was in the wilderness that God revealed himself to Moses (Ex 3), gave the law, and entered into the covenant with Israel (ch 19). It was also the site of refuge for David (1 Sm 23–26; Ps 63) and Elijah (1 Kgs 19), and in this light became the anticipated site of God’s future deliverance (Is 40:3-5; Ez 47:1-12; Hos 2:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The unusual dress of John the Baptist—“clothing made of camel’s hair, with a leather belt around his waist” (Mk 1:6, <span>niv<\/span>)—may have suggested to his audience an association with Elijah in particular (2 Kgs 1:8) or with the prophets in general (Zec 13:4). His diet, “locusts and wild honey” (Mk 1:6), was Levitically clean, reflecting one who lived off the desert (such food was also eaten at Qumran) and formed part of the broader asceticism practiced by John and his disciples (Mt 9:14; 11:18).<\/p>\n<p>Who did John understand himself to be? In answer to questions by the multitude whether he was the Messiah, Elijah, or the expected prophet (Jn 1:20-23), John only identified himself as “a voice crying in the wilderness, ‘Prepare the way of the Lord’ ” (Is 40:3). The background for the question lies at the end of the OT period. Prophecy, on the one hand, was considered to have ceased (Zec 13:2-6); yet, on the other hand, it was expected to appear again before the coming of the messianic kingdom (see Jl 2:28-29; Mal 3:1-4). Some anticipated this final prophet to be one who was like Moses (Dt 18:15), others a returning Elijah as foretold in Malachi 4:5-6. While John personally refrained from identifying himself with these specific expectations (Jn 1:20-23), it is clear that his dress, lifestyle, and message caused the people to identify him with this end-time prophet (Mt 14:5; Mk 11:32). Jesus also saw John as this final “Elijah-like” prophet (Mt 11:7-15), who from Malachi’s prophecy was to be a forerunner to the coming of the Lord (Mal 3:1-4; 4:5-6).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsProclamation\">John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>John’s proclamation involved three elements: a warning of imminent judgment at the hands of the Coming One, a call for repentance in light of the coming kingdom of heaven, and a demand to express this repentance in concrete ethical terms. Many Jews looked forward confidently to the messianic judgment as a time of blessing for themselves and destruction for the gentile oppressors. John, however, warned that Jewish ancestry was false security in the coming judgment (Lk 3:8); true repentance was the only means of escaping destruction (Mt 3:2). John anticipated this judgment at the hands of the Coming One, who would baptize the nation with “the Holy Spirit and with fire” (Lk 3:16). Fire represented the OT means of destruction in the end time (Mal 4:1) as well as purification (Mal 3:1-4), while the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the end time connoted blessing (Is 32:15; Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28) and purification (Is 4:2-4). The judgment anticipated by John was therefore twofold: destruction for the unrepentant, and blessing for the penitent and righteous (Mt 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>In light of this imminent event John called for repentance on the part of his listeners (Mt 3:2), a true “turning back” or “turning toward” God in obedience that would bring forgiveness of sin. Such a turnabout in an individual’s relation with God should be lived out in one’s everyday dealings: fairness on the part of tax collectors (Lk 3:12-13) and soldiers (v 14), and the general requirement of compassion for the poor (vv 10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsBaptism\">John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels record that John baptized those repentant of their sins at several locations: the Jordan River (Mk 1:5), Bethany beyond the Jordan (Jn 1:28), and Aenon near Salim (Jn 3:23). This practice was an integral part of John’s call for repentance, given in light of the approaching judgment and the appearance of the Coming One. The baptism of the penitent symbolized desire for forgiveness of sin, a renunciation of past life, and a desire to be included in the coming messianic kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>What was the background for John’s practice of baptism? From the OT we know of ceremonial lustrations or washings that guaranteed ritual purity (Lv 14–15; Nm 19). Unlike John’s baptism, these washings were repetitive in nature and referred predominantly to ritual rather than moral cleansing. The prophets, however, urged a moral purification associated with the washing of water (Is 1:16-18; Jer 4:14). More significantly, the prophets anticipated a cleansing by God in the end times preceding the Day of Judgment (Ez 36:25; Zec 13:1; cf. Is 44:3), an eschatological element that John may have assumed was being fulfilled in his water baptism.<\/p>\n<p>Another precedent for John’s practice may have been proselyte baptism, a rite (along with circumcision and the offering of sacrifices) that constituted the conversion of a Gentile to Judaism. Common to both proselyte baptism and John’s baptism were the emphasis on an ethical break with the past, a once-for-all character, and the similarity of immersion. Notable differences were that John’s baptism was for Jews, not Gentile converts, and that it had a marked eschatological character as a preparation for the new age. Unless John, in light of the imminence of the messianic age, consciously treated all Jews as “pagan” in need of a baptism of repentance (cf. Mt 3:7-10), it is doubtful that proselyte baptism formed the primary background for John’s baptismal ministry.<\/p>\n<p>If John’s baptism had a clear association with the forgiveness of sin, the question naturally arises as to why Jesus, the Son of God, sought baptism from John. John himself asks this very question of Jesus (Mt 3:14), to which Jesus responds, “It must be done, because we must do everything that is right” (v 15, <span>nlt<\/span>). First, it is clear that Jesus’ baptism represented an act of obedience on his part to God’s will as he saw it. Second, by submitting to the baptism of John, Jesus was clearly validating the ministry and message of John. The imminent coming of the kingdom and its Messiah, and the need for repentance in anticipation of this event that John proclaimed, were affirmed by Jesus through baptism. Third, by being baptized, Jesus condemned the self-righteous for their lack of repentance and took a stand with the penitent publicans and sinners awaiting the kingdom of God (Lk 7:29-30). Fourth, Jesus stepped forward for baptism not as an individual in need of forgiveness but as one who represented the people of God. His baptism, therefore, demonstrated solidarity with the people in their need of deliverance, even as he is judged in their place on the cross. Finally, the voice from heaven (Mk 1:11) and the descent of the Spirit (Lk 3:21-22) signify the inauguration of Jesus’ own ministry through his baptism by John.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsViewofJesus\">John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>Throughout his ministry John pointed beyond himself to one “who is far greater than I am—so much greater that I am not even worthy to be his slave” (Mk 1:7, <span>nlt<\/span>). His self-understanding apparently sprang from the application of Isaiah 40:3 to himself, that he was the preparer or forerunner for God’s coming activity through the Messiah (Lk 3:4-6). When asked by curious spectators, John firmly denied that he was the Messiah, and according to the Gospel accounts, subordinated himself to the Coming One (Mk 1:7-8; Jn 1:26-28; 3:28-31). The coming of Jesus to baptism seems to represent the first time John identified these expectations with Jesus himself (Jn 1:35-36). His recognition of Jesus as the Messiah prior to baptism (Mt 3:14) was confirmed by the descent of the Holy Spirit as a dove and the voice from heaven quoting a phrase from an OT messianic psalm (Mk 1:11a, from Ps 2:7), together with a phrase from a Suffering Servant song of Isaiah (Mk 1:11b, from Is 42:1). In the fourth Gospel, John the Baptist goes even further in acknowledging Jesus to be the “Lamb of God” (Jn 1:29), in anticipation of Jesus’ sacrificial role on the cross. And John recognized him as “God’s Chosen One” (v 34, <span>neb<\/span>—another term for the Messiah; Ps 2:7, see Mk 1:11).<\/p>\n<p>In light of John’s strong affirmation, it is at first difficult to understand his questioning of Jesus while imprisoned: “Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?” (Mt 11:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). Some have suggested that John was merely asking for the sake of his disciples, or that the question reflected John’s despondency with being imprisoned. It is more likely, however, that the question represents John’s own confusion with the activity expected of the Messiah. John had proclaimed a Coming One who would bring a baptism of fire and judgment upon the wicked (Lk 3:16). It may have been difficult for him to understand Jesus’ different emphases on forgiveness and acceptance of sinners (Mt 9:9-13) and his healing of the sick (Mt 8–9). When John’s disciples brought their master’s question to Jesus, asking whether or not he was the Messiah, Jesus responded by quoting Isaiah 35:5-6 (see also Is 61:1). This text proclaims the activities of healing and proclaiming salvation to the poor to be fulfillments of the Messiah’s role, even though they may not have been what John or countless other Jews expected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusViewofJohn\">Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>That Jesus highly regarded John the Baptist is indicated by his baptism by John. It is also explicitly stated on several occasions. Jesus called him the greatest man to have ever lived (Lk 7:28). (Of course, he was not as great as Jesus, the God-man.) Jesus also said that John was a burning and shining lamp (Jn 5:33-35) and that he practiced a baptism divinely ordained (Lk 20:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>John’s uniqueness, however, lies in the fact that he stood at the turning of the ages. He was the last of the old era, the period of the law and the prophets (Lk 16:16), which was to precede the coming of the messianic age (the kingdom of God). John was the last of the prophets, the greatest of them, the Elijah figure who would prepare the way for the judgment of God (Mt 11:13-15; Lk 1:17). Because John belonged to the era of the law and the prophets, however, he was not as great as the “least” already in the kingdom of God (Mt 11:11)—that is, those who belonged to the era of the kingdom’s appearance in Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ArrestImprisonmentandMartyrdom\">Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>To understand why John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas, one has to grasp the messianic excitement caused by John’s appearance and message (Lk 3:15-18). Herod and other secular rulers were obviously suspicious of anyone who might stir up the crowds with predictions of a coming messianic ruler. Other messianic movements had arisen before John, which resulted in outbreaks of violence against the Roman-Herodian rulership. Moreover, Herod Antipas was under heavy criticism for his marriage with Herodias, the ex-wife of his brother Philip. His first marriage, with the daughter of Aretus II, constituted a political alliance between the Herodian family and the Nabatean kingdom of Perea. His new relationship with Herodias was perceived as a breach of the political alliance and led to friction between the two families. John’s denunciation of Herod’s new marriage (Mt 14:3-12) could thus have been interpreted by Herod as a subversive rousing of sentiment against his authority. The Jewish historian Josephus states that Herod did, in fact, arrest John because he feared John’s influence over the crowds. According to Josephus, John was imprisoned at the fortress Machaerus on the eastern side of the Dead Sea. That he was not killed immediately was due to Herod’s personal fear of the righteous John (Mk 6:2) and of the people’s reaction (Mt 14:5). On a point about which Josephus is silent, the Gospels record that it was Herodias’s feelings against John (Mk 6:17) and her plot, through the dancing of her daughter, which brought about the beheading of John (vv 21-29). John was beheaded at Herodias’s request in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29 or 30.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheDisciplesofJohn\">The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p>While it is clear that a band of disciples formed around John in his lifetime (Jn 1:35), to suggest that he intended to begin a continuing movement is contradicted by his message on the imminent Day of Judgment. Apparently, John’s disciples consisted of a small group of those who had been baptized by him and were awaiting the coming Messiah. Some transferred their loyalty to Jesus after John had identified Jesus as the Coming One (Jn 1:37). Others, however, apparently stayed on with their teacher, communicating with the imprisoned John concerning the activities of Jesus (Lk 7:18-23) and, after his death, taking the body for burial (Mk 6:29).<\/p>\n<p>We know little about the activities and practices of the band of disciples clustered around John. We do know, however, that fasting was one practice specifically associated with the group, and one that marked them as similar to the Pharisees (Mt 9:14). In this practice they no doubt followed the example of John himself (Lk 7:33). Prayer and fasting were often linked in late Judaism. The disciples of John were also known for the prayers taught by their master (11:1). Seeing this practice, the disciples of Jesus asked the Lord to teach them to pray, to which Jesus responded with the Lord’s Prayer (vv 2-4).<\/p>\n<p>After his death it is likely that other disciples of John joined the followers of Jesus (see Lk 7:29-30). Not all did so, however, as disciples of John were encountered by Paul and other Christians approximately 25 years later in Ephesus (Acts 18:24–29:7). Upon hearing witness to Jesus, these followers of John proclaimed Jesus as Messiah. When Paul baptized them in the name of Jesus they received the Holy Spirit (19:4-7). Even so, it is apparent from later documents that various groups continued to honor John, even considering him the Messiah, centuries after the NT period.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOHN THE BAPTIST<\/h3>\n<p>Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29, while Jesus was still ministering.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>• Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>• John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>• Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>• The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BirthInfancyandBoyhood\">Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s Gospel is our only source of information concerning the birth and boyhood of John. The Gospel writer states that John was born in the hill country of Judah (Lk 1:39) of priestly descent, being the son of Zechariah, a priest of the order of Abijah, and Elizabeth, a descendant of Aaron (v 5). Both parents were righteous in the sight of God, following all the commandments closely (v 6). Like the birth of Jesus, only to a much lesser degree, the birth of John the Baptist is described in Luke as extraordinary. The angel Gabriel announced the coming birth to Zechariah in the temple; to the older, barren Elizabeth it came as an answer to prayer (vv 8-13). John’s name is announced to Zechariah by the angel, even as his purpose as forerunner is revealed before birth (vv 13-17). Such a consecration from birth is reminiscent of the call of the OT prophet Jeremiah (cf. Jer 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>There existed some familial relationship between the families of John and Jesus. Elizabeth is described as a relative of Mary (Lk 1:36), which may connote cousin or aunt, or may only mean being from the same tribe.<\/p>\n<p>John’s childhood, as that of Jesus, is left quite vague in the Gospel account. All that is said is that “John grew up and became strong in spirit. Then he lived out in the wilderness until he began his public ministry to Israel” (Lk 1:80, <span>nlt<\/span>). Some scholars have suggested that John might have been adopted as a boy by the Essenes (as was their practice) at Qumran and reared in their wilderness community, adjacent to the Dead Sea and near the Jordan River. There are some similarities between the activities of the Qumran sect, known through the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the later ministry of John the Baptist. Both practiced a type of asceticism and removed themselves from the life of Jerusalem. Both practiced baptism and associated this rite with initiation and repentance. Finally, John and the Qumran group were both eschatologically minded, awaiting God’s final end-time activity in history. Nevertheless, many significant differences exist between John and the Qumran sect.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AppearanceandIdentity\">Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>Mark’s Gospel begins with an account of John the Baptist’s appearance: “John the Baptist . . . lived in the wilderness and was preaching that people should be baptized to show that they had turned from their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Mk 1:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). A rich OT background lies behind John’s association with the wilderness, in this case the wilderness of Judea. It was in the wilderness that God revealed himself to Moses (Ex 3), gave the law, and entered into the covenant with Israel (ch 19). It was also the site of refuge for David (1 Sm 23–26; Ps 63) and Elijah (1 Kgs 19), and in this light became the anticipated site of God’s future deliverance (Is 40:3-5; Ez 47:1-12; Hos 2:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The unusual dress of John the Baptist—“clothing made of camel’s hair, with a leather belt around his waist” (Mk 1:6, <span>niv<\/span>)—may have suggested to his audience an association with Elijah in particular (2 Kgs 1:8) or with the prophets in general (Zec 13:4). His diet, “locusts and wild honey” (Mk 1:6), was Levitically clean, reflecting one who lived off the desert (such food was also eaten at Qumran) and formed part of the broader asceticism practiced by John and his disciples (Mt 9:14; 11:18).<\/p>\n<p>Who did John understand himself to be? In answer to questions by the multitude whether he was the Messiah, Elijah, or the expected prophet (Jn 1:20-23), John only identified himself as “a voice crying in the wilderness, ‘Prepare the way of the Lord’ ” (Is 40:3). The background for the question lies at the end of the OT period. Prophecy, on the one hand, was considered to have ceased (Zec 13:2-6); yet, on the other hand, it was expected to appear again before the coming of the messianic kingdom (see Jl 2:28-29; Mal 3:1-4). Some anticipated this final prophet to be one who was like Moses (Dt 18:15), others a returning Elijah as foretold in Malachi 4:5-6. While John personally refrained from identifying himself with these specific expectations (Jn 1:20-23), it is clear that his dress, lifestyle, and message caused the people to identify him with this end-time prophet (Mt 14:5; Mk 11:32). Jesus also saw John as this final “Elijah-like” prophet (Mt 11:7-15), who from Malachi’s prophecy was to be a forerunner to the coming of the Lord (Mal 3:1-4; 4:5-6).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsProclamation\">John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>John’s proclamation involved three elements: a warning of imminent judgment at the hands of the Coming One, a call for repentance in light of the coming kingdom of heaven, and a demand to express this repentance in concrete ethical terms. Many Jews looked forward confidently to the messianic judgment as a time of blessing for themselves and destruction for the gentile oppressors. John, however, warned that Jewish ancestry was false security in the coming judgment (Lk 3:8); true repentance was the only means of escaping destruction (Mt 3:2). John anticipated this judgment at the hands of the Coming One, who would baptize the nation with “the Holy Spirit and with fire” (Lk 3:16). Fire represented the OT means of destruction in the end time (Mal 4:1) as well as purification (Mal 3:1-4), while the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the end time connoted blessing (Is 32:15; Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28) and purification (Is 4:2-4). The judgment anticipated by John was therefore twofold: destruction for the unrepentant, and blessing for the penitent and righteous (Mt 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>In light of this imminent event John called for repentance on the part of his listeners (Mt 3:2), a true “turning back” or “turning toward” God in obedience that would bring forgiveness of sin. Such a turnabout in an individual’s relation with God should be lived out in one’s everyday dealings: fairness on the part of tax collectors (Lk 3:12-13) and soldiers (v 14), and the general requirement of compassion for the poor (vv 10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsBaptism\">John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels record that John baptized those repentant of their sins at several locations: the Jordan River (Mk 1:5), Bethany beyond the Jordan (Jn 1:28), and Aenon near Salim (Jn 3:23). This practice was an integral part of John’s call for repentance, given in light of the approaching judgment and the appearance of the Coming One. The baptism of the penitent symbolized desire for forgiveness of sin, a renunciation of past life, and a desire to be included in the coming messianic kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>What was the background for John’s practice of baptism? From the OT we know of ceremonial lustrations or washings that guaranteed ritual purity (Lv 14–15; Nm 19). Unlike John’s baptism, these washings were repetitive in nature and referred predominantly to ritual rather than moral cleansing. The prophets, however, urged a moral purification associated with the washing of water (Is 1:16-18; Jer 4:14). More significantly, the prophets anticipated a cleansing by God in the end times preceding the Day of Judgment (Ez 36:25; Zec 13:1; cf. Is 44:3), an eschatological element that John may have assumed was being fulfilled in his water baptism.<\/p>\n<p>Another precedent for John’s practice may have been proselyte baptism, a rite (along with circumcision and the offering of sacrifices) that constituted the conversion of a Gentile to Judaism. Common to both proselyte baptism and John’s baptism were the emphasis on an ethical break with the past, a once-for-all character, and the similarity of immersion. Notable differences were that John’s baptism was for Jews, not Gentile converts, and that it had a marked eschatological character as a preparation for the new age. Unless John, in light of the imminence of the messianic age, consciously treated all Jews as “pagan” in need of a baptism of repentance (cf. Mt 3:7-10), it is doubtful that proselyte baptism formed the primary background for John’s baptismal ministry.<\/p>\n<p>If John’s baptism had a clear association with the forgiveness of sin, the question naturally arises as to why Jesus, the Son of God, sought baptism from John. John himself asks this very question of Jesus (Mt 3:14), to which Jesus responds, “It must be done, because we must do everything that is right” (v 15, <span>nlt<\/span>). First, it is clear that Jesus’ baptism represented an act of obedience on his part to God’s will as he saw it. Second, by submitting to the baptism of John, Jesus was clearly validating the ministry and message of John. The imminent coming of the kingdom and its Messiah, and the need for repentance in anticipation of this event that John proclaimed, were affirmed by Jesus through baptism. Third, by being baptized, Jesus condemned the self-righteous for their lack of repentance and took a stand with the penitent publicans and sinners awaiting the kingdom of God (Lk 7:29-30). Fourth, Jesus stepped forward for baptism not as an individual in need of forgiveness but as one who represented the people of God. His baptism, therefore, demonstrated solidarity with the people in their need of deliverance, even as he is judged in their place on the cross. Finally, the voice from heaven (Mk 1:11) and the descent of the Spirit (Lk 3:21-22) signify the inauguration of Jesus’ own ministry through his baptism by John.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsViewofJesus\">John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>Throughout his ministry John pointed beyond himself to one “who is far greater than I am—so much greater that I am not even worthy to be his slave” (Mk 1:7, <span>nlt<\/span>). His self-understanding apparently sprang from the application of Isaiah 40:3 to himself, that he was the preparer or forerunner for God’s coming activity through the Messiah (Lk 3:4-6). When asked by curious spectators, John firmly denied that he was the Messiah, and according to the Gospel accounts, subordinated himself to the Coming One (Mk 1:7-8; Jn 1:26-28; 3:28-31). The coming of Jesus to baptism seems to represent the first time John identified these expectations with Jesus himself (Jn 1:35-36). His recognition of Jesus as the Messiah prior to baptism (Mt 3:14) was confirmed by the descent of the Holy Spirit as a dove and the voice from heaven quoting a phrase from an OT messianic psalm (Mk 1:11a, from Ps 2:7), together with a phrase from a Suffering Servant song of Isaiah (Mk 1:11b, from Is 42:1). In the fourth Gospel, John the Baptist goes even further in acknowledging Jesus to be the “Lamb of God” (Jn 1:29), in anticipation of Jesus’ sacrificial role on the cross. And John recognized him as “God’s Chosen One” (v 34, <span>neb<\/span>—another term for the Messiah; Ps 2:7, see Mk 1:11).<\/p>\n<p>In light of John’s strong affirmation, it is at first difficult to understand his questioning of Jesus while imprisoned: “Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?” (Mt 11:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). Some have suggested that John was merely asking for the sake of his disciples, or that the question reflected John’s despondency with being imprisoned. It is more likely, however, that the question represents John’s own confusion with the activity expected of the Messiah. John had proclaimed a Coming One who would bring a baptism of fire and judgment upon the wicked (Lk 3:16). It may have been difficult for him to understand Jesus’ different emphases on forgiveness and acceptance of sinners (Mt 9:9-13) and his healing of the sick (Mt 8–9). When John’s disciples brought their master’s question to Jesus, asking whether or not he was the Messiah, Jesus responded by quoting Isaiah 35:5-6 (see also Is 61:1). This text proclaims the activities of healing and proclaiming salvation to the poor to be fulfillments of the Messiah’s role, even though they may not have been what John or countless other Jews expected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusViewofJohn\">Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>That Jesus highly regarded John the Baptist is indicated by his baptism by John. It is also explicitly stated on several occasions. Jesus called him the greatest man to have ever lived (Lk 7:28). (Of course, he was not as great as Jesus, the God-man.) Jesus also said that John was a burning and shining lamp (Jn 5:33-35) and that he practiced a baptism divinely ordained (Lk 20:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>John’s uniqueness, however, lies in the fact that he stood at the turning of the ages. He was the last of the old era, the period of the law and the prophets (Lk 16:16), which was to precede the coming of the messianic age (the kingdom of God). John was the last of the prophets, the greatest of them, the Elijah figure who would prepare the way for the judgment of God (Mt 11:13-15; Lk 1:17). Because John belonged to the era of the law and the prophets, however, he was not as great as the “least” already in the kingdom of God (Mt 11:11)—that is, those who belonged to the era of the kingdom’s appearance in Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ArrestImprisonmentandMartyrdom\">Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>To understand why John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas, one has to grasp the messianic excitement caused by John’s appearance and message (Lk 3:15-18). Herod and other secular rulers were obviously suspicious of anyone who might stir up the crowds with predictions of a coming messianic ruler. Other messianic movements had arisen before John, which resulted in outbreaks of violence against the Roman-Herodian rulership. Moreover, Herod Antipas was under heavy criticism for his marriage with Herodias, the ex-wife of his brother Philip. His first marriage, with the daughter of Aretus II, constituted a political alliance between the Herodian family and the Nabatean kingdom of Perea. His new relationship with Herodias was perceived as a breach of the political alliance and led to friction between the two families. John’s denunciation of Herod’s new marriage (Mt 14:3-12) could thus have been interpreted by Herod as a subversive rousing of sentiment against his authority. The Jewish historian Josephus states that Herod did, in fact, arrest John because he feared John’s influence over the crowds. According to Josephus, John was imprisoned at the fortress Machaerus on the eastern side of the Dead Sea. That he was not killed immediately was due to Herod’s personal fear of the righteous John (Mk 6:2) and of the people’s reaction (Mt 14:5). On a point about which Josephus is silent, the Gospels record that it was Herodias’s feelings against John (Mk 6:17) and her plot, through the dancing of her daughter, which brought about the beheading of John (vv 21-29). John was beheaded at Herodias’s request in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29 or 30.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheDisciplesofJohn\">The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p>While it is clear that a band of disciples formed around John in his lifetime (Jn 1:35), to suggest that he intended to begin a continuing movement is contradicted by his message on the imminent Day of Judgment. Apparently, John’s disciples consisted of a small group of those who had been baptized by him and were awaiting the coming Messiah. Some transferred their loyalty to Jesus after John had identified Jesus as the Coming One (Jn 1:37). Others, however, apparently stayed on with their teacher, communicating with the imprisoned John concerning the activities of Jesus (Lk 7:18-23) and, after his death, taking the body for burial (Mk 6:29).<\/p>\n<p>We know little about the activities and practices of the band of disciples clustered around John. We do know, however, that fasting was one practice specifically associated with the group, and one that marked them as similar to the Pharisees (Mt 9:14). In this practice they no doubt followed the example of John himself (Lk 7:33). Prayer and fasting were often linked in late Judaism. The disciples of John were also known for the prayers taught by their master (11:1). Seeing this practice, the disciples of Jesus asked the Lord to teach them to pray, to which Jesus responded with the Lord’s Prayer (vv 2-4).<\/p>\n<p>After his death it is likely that other disciples of John joined the followers of Jesus (see Lk 7:29-30). Not all did so, however, as disciples of John were encountered by Paul and other Christians approximately 25 years later in Ephesus (Acts 18:24–29:7). Upon hearing witness to Jesus, these followers of John proclaimed Jesus as Messiah. When Paul baptized them in the name of Jesus they received the Holy Spirit (19:4-7). Even so, it is apparent from later documents that various groups continued to honor John, even considering him the Messiah, centuries after the NT period.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOHN THE BAPTIST Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately AD 29, while Jesus was still ministering. Preview • Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood • Appearance and Identity • John’s Proclamation • ...","summary_en":"JOHN THE BAPTIST Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately AD 29, while Jesus was still ministering. Preview • Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood • Appearance and Identity • John’s Proclamation • ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":22419,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Lamb of God","title_en":"Lamb of God","content_ro":"<h3>LAMB OF GOD<\/h3>\n<p>General term used twice by John the Baptist (Jn 1:29, 36), adding on the first instance “who takes away the world’s sin!” He does not explain what the term means. Christians use the term freely, but what do they mean by it? Why would anyone be called “God’s Lamb”?<\/p>\n<p>Some maintain that John saw Jesus fulfilling all that the Passover means and that this is a way of referring to the Passover lamb. It is true that the fourth Gospel places the death of Jesus at the time the Passover sacrifices were killed. But “Passover lamb” is a modern expression; not one example of its use is known to occur in antiquity. When people wanted to refer to the animal killed for this sacrifice, they simply called it “the Passover” (Ex 12:21, cf. 1 Cor 5:7, <span>kjv<\/span>). The Passover victim was not necessarily a lamb; it might be, and often was, a kid. There is no reason for seeing the Passover in this expression.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars think the image comes from Isaiah 53. They see the lamb led to the slaughter (v 7) as a way of referring to the Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>Other scholars think there is an allusion to the triumphant lamb of the apocalypses. The writers of apocalyptic literature used vivid imagery to reveal their meaning to initiates and to conceal it from outsiders. They sometimes used the lamb as a symbol of a conqueror (cf. the use of “the Lamb” for “the Mighty One” in Revelation). These scholars think that John was pointing to Jesus as the Messiah, King of Israel. Many find this view attractive. The royalty it ascribes to Jesus is certainly congenial to John. But against it is the weighty consideration that John was speaking about a Lamb who takes away sin, while the apocalyptic lamb is normally a conqueror. The roles are different. Further, it is not easy to see how non-Jewish readers of the Gospel at the time it was written would have been able to discern the point of apocalyptic imagery.<\/p>\n<p>There are other suggestions. The “gentle lamb” (Jer 11:19), the daily sacrifice in the temple, the scapegoat, and the guilt offering have all been put forward with some confidence. But no one has produced evidence that any of these was ever called “God’s lamb.”<\/p>\n<p>In the OT passages referring to a lamb, nearly all of them speak of sacrifice (85 out of the total of 96). Combined with a reference to the taking away of sin, it is difficult to see how a reference to sacrificial atonement is to be rejected. Characteristically the lamb in Scripture puts away sin by being sacrificed. “God’s Lamb” means that this provision is made by God himself. A reference to sacrifice seems undeniable, but a connection with any one sacrifice is hard to make. All that the OT sacrifices foreshadowed, Christ perfectly fulfilled. God’s Lamb puts sin away finally.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Feasts and Festivals of Israel; John, The Apostle; John, Gospel of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LAMB OF GOD<\/h3>\n<p>General term used twice by John the Baptist (Jn 1:29, 36), adding on the first instance “who takes away the world’s sin!” He does not explain what the term means. Christians use the term freely, but what do they mean by it? Why would anyone be called “God’s Lamb”?<\/p>\n<p>Some maintain that John saw Jesus fulfilling all that the Passover means and that this is a way of referring to the Passover lamb. It is true that the fourth Gospel places the death of Jesus at the time the Passover sacrifices were killed. But “Passover lamb” is a modern expression; not one example of its use is known to occur in antiquity. When people wanted to refer to the animal killed for this sacrifice, they simply called it “the Passover” (Ex 12:21, cf. 1 Cor 5:7, <span>kjv<\/span>). The Passover victim was not necessarily a lamb; it might be, and often was, a kid. There is no reason for seeing the Passover in this expression.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars think the image comes from Isaiah 53. They see the lamb led to the slaughter (v 7) as a way of referring to the Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>Other scholars think there is an allusion to the triumphant lamb of the apocalypses. The writers of apocalyptic literature used vivid imagery to reveal their meaning to initiates and to conceal it from outsiders. They sometimes used the lamb as a symbol of a conqueror (cf. the use of “the Lamb” for “the Mighty One” in Revelation). These scholars think that John was pointing to Jesus as the Messiah, King of Israel. Many find this view attractive. The royalty it ascribes to Jesus is certainly congenial to John. But against it is the weighty consideration that John was speaking about a Lamb who takes away sin, while the apocalyptic lamb is normally a conqueror. The roles are different. Further, it is not easy to see how non-Jewish readers of the Gospel at the time it was written would have been able to discern the point of apocalyptic imagery.<\/p>\n<p>There are other suggestions. The “gentle lamb” (Jer 11:19), the daily sacrifice in the temple, the scapegoat, and the guilt offering have all been put forward with some confidence. But no one has produced evidence that any of these was ever called “God’s lamb.”<\/p>\n<p>In the OT passages referring to a lamb, nearly all of them speak of sacrifice (85 out of the total of 96). Combined with a reference to the taking away of sin, it is difficult to see how a reference to sacrificial atonement is to be rejected. Characteristically the lamb in Scripture puts away sin by being sacrificed. “God’s Lamb” means that this provision is made by God himself. A reference to sacrifice seems undeniable, but a connection with any one sacrifice is hard to make. All that the OT sacrifices foreshadowed, Christ perfectly fulfilled. God’s Lamb puts sin away finally.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Feasts and Festivals of Israel; John, The Apostle; John, Gospel of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LAMB OF GOD General term used twice by John the Baptist (Jn 1:29, 36), adding on the first instance “who takes away the world’s sin!” He does not explain what the term means. Christians use the term freely, but what do they mean by it? Why would anyone be called “God’s Lamb”? Some maintain that John saw Jesus fulfilling all that the Passover means and that this is a way of referring to the Passover lamb. It is true that the fourth Gospel places the death of Jesus at the time the Passover sacr...","summary_en":"LAMB OF GOD General term used twice by John the Baptist (Jn 1:29, 36), adding on the first instance “who takes away the world’s sin!” He does not explain what the term means. Christians use the term freely, but what do they mean by it? Why would anyone be called “God’s Lamb”? Some maintain that John saw Jesus fulfilling all that the Passover means and that this is a way of referring to the Passover lamb. It is true that the fourth Gospel places the death of Jesus at the time the Passover sacr...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24945,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Mediator Mediate","title_en":"Mediator Mediate","content_ro":"<h3>MEDIATE, MEDIATOR<\/h3>\n<p>The act of an intermediary, go-between, or expert in divine things, not to negotiate agreement or compromise but to approach God on behalf of others, and so to convey desired knowledge and reassurance with divine authority.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Job voices longing for such a mediator (translated here from the LXX): “God is not a mortal like me, so I cannot argue with him or take him to trial. If only there were a mediator who could bring us together, but there is none. The mediator could make God stop beating me, and I would no longer live in terror of his punishment. Then I could speak to him without fear, but I cannot do that in my own strength” (Jb 9:32-35).<\/p>\n<p>More familiar is the mediation of instruction concerning the divine character and will. The Mosaic covenant was given through the mediation of angels and of Moses (Ex 20:18-21; Dt 33:2; Acts 7:53; Gal 3:19; contrast Heb 6:13-17, where God, acting alone, “mediated” an oath). The terms of the covenant law were expounded by prophets who “stood in God’s council,” and by priests who communicated God’s mind by oracle, sacred lot, and pronounced blessing (Dt 10:8; 33:8-10; 2 Chr 15:3; Jer 23:10-11, 18-22, 31-34; Mi 3:11; Mal 2:7).<\/p>\n<p>Most familiar is the liturgical mediation of the priest, whether by Moses (Ex 24:4-8) or by an appointed person trained in the rituals of worship (28:1). Because of Israel’s emphasis upon the holiness of God, sacrificial expiation, or “covering,” of sin figured largely in priestly mediation. The priest represented before God the people’s penitence, confession, and prayers for forgiveness, bearing the tribes’ names on shoulders and breastplate, and represented God, in turn, assuring his favor, forgiveness, and protection (see Heb 5:1-4; 7:27–10:11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>It was natural that the mission of Jesus should be described in mediatorial terms, and first as that of a prophet speaking for God to humans, making God known (Mk 6:15; 8:28). Where applied to Jesus, the actual title “mediator” refers mainly to his institution of a new covenant, establishing God’s new relationship with people (Heb 8:6; 9:15; 12:24). The one other instance is 1 Timothy 2:5, where the unity of God requires a sole, unrivaled mediator, namely, Christ.<\/p>\n<p>This last reference mentions Christ’s giving himself as “a ransom for all.” This essentially priestly function is the theme of Hebrews. Christ as Son of God, divinely appointed, sinless, suffering, tempted, sympathizing, and obedient, is uniquely qualified to be High Priest of his people. As priest, he offers a perfect sacrifice and lives forever to intercede for those who draw near to God through him. This mediatorial ministry places Jesus at “the right hand of God.” His intercession for people is mentioned also in Romans 8:34 and probably in 1 John 2:1, where ancient Greek commentators, <span>neb<\/span>, and other authoritative sources so understand “paraclete,” here applied to Jesus. His mediatorial sacrifice is mentioned in Matthew (Mt 26:28), John (Jn 1:29), Romans (Rom 3:25), and 1 John (1 Jn 1:7; 2:2; 4:10).<\/p>\n<p>Still more significant is the insistence, everywhere in the NT, that man’s knowledge of God, salvation, and hope come through Christ alone. Made poor for our sakes, he died and rose “for us”; our peace, access to God, reconciliation, expiation of sin, grace, truth, prayer, and “all spiritual blessings” are “through him,” “in him,” “through his blood,” and “in his name.” The purpose of God focuses in him; he mediated at Creation and at redemption (Col 1:15, 22); in him all the fullness of God dwells, and the face of Christ reveals God’s glory. No one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son reveals him; no one comes to the Father but by him; neither is there salvation in any other.<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s mediation is the fulfillment and end of all mediation between God and humankind. The book of Hebrews opens with the assertion that Christ surpasses all other mediators—angels, Moses, the Aaronic priesthood. His is a timeless priesthood, like Melchizedek’s. His sacrifice is unrepeatable, “once for all time,” and by it we have been consecrated to God “for all time.” The covenant he established between God and people offers better promises, sacrifice, sanctuary, and hope (Heb 7:19; 8:6; 9:1, 11-15). Christ’s mediation so far excels all others that it can never be superseded; he is priest without rival and forever (cf. 1 Tm 2:5).<\/p>\n<p>Without using the priestly analogy, John emphasizes the same truth. The gulf between divine and human has been crossed, decisively and finally, by the Incarnation. Instead of standing between God and man, Christ unites both within himself by becoming man. Mediating in the beginning at Creation, Christ is himself the Word, which from God’s side mediates God’s mind, embodies God’s message, and conveys God’s power. No one has seen God at any time, but as unique Son and divine, Jesus “expounds” God (Jn 1:18). From the human side, Jesus prays for the disciples (ch 17), offers perfect obedience, lays down his life for his flock, and offers the unblemished sacrifice that bears away the sin of the world.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Reconciliation.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MEDIATE, MEDIATOR<\/h3>\n<p>The act of an intermediary, go-between, or expert in divine things, not to negotiate agreement or compromise but to approach God on behalf of others, and so to convey desired knowledge and reassurance with divine authority.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Job voices longing for such a mediator (translated here from the LXX): “God is not a mortal like me, so I cannot argue with him or take him to trial. If only there were a mediator who could bring us together, but there is none. The mediator could make God stop beating me, and I would no longer live in terror of his punishment. Then I could speak to him without fear, but I cannot do that in my own strength” (Jb 9:32-35).<\/p>\n<p>More familiar is the mediation of instruction concerning the divine character and will. The Mosaic covenant was given through the mediation of angels and of Moses (Ex 20:18-21; Dt 33:2; Acts 7:53; Gal 3:19; contrast Heb 6:13-17, where God, acting alone, “mediated” an oath). The terms of the covenant law were expounded by prophets who “stood in God’s council,” and by priests who communicated God’s mind by oracle, sacred lot, and pronounced blessing (Dt 10:8; 33:8-10; 2 Chr 15:3; Jer 23:10-11, 18-22, 31-34; Mi 3:11; Mal 2:7).<\/p>\n<p>Most familiar is the liturgical mediation of the priest, whether by Moses (Ex 24:4-8) or by an appointed person trained in the rituals of worship (28:1). Because of Israel’s emphasis upon the holiness of God, sacrificial expiation, or “covering,” of sin figured largely in priestly mediation. The priest represented before God the people’s penitence, confession, and prayers for forgiveness, bearing the tribes’ names on shoulders and breastplate, and represented God, in turn, assuring his favor, forgiveness, and protection (see Heb 5:1-4; 7:27–10:11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>It was natural that the mission of Jesus should be described in mediatorial terms, and first as that of a prophet speaking for God to humans, making God known (Mk 6:15; 8:28). Where applied to Jesus, the actual title “mediator” refers mainly to his institution of a new covenant, establishing God’s new relationship with people (Heb 8:6; 9:15; 12:24). The one other instance is 1 Timothy 2:5, where the unity of God requires a sole, unrivaled mediator, namely, Christ.<\/p>\n<p>This last reference mentions Christ’s giving himself as “a ransom for all.” This essentially priestly function is the theme of Hebrews. Christ as Son of God, divinely appointed, sinless, suffering, tempted, sympathizing, and obedient, is uniquely qualified to be High Priest of his people. As priest, he offers a perfect sacrifice and lives forever to intercede for those who draw near to God through him. This mediatorial ministry places Jesus at “the right hand of God.” His intercession for people is mentioned also in Romans 8:34 and probably in 1 John 2:1, where ancient Greek commentators, <span>neb<\/span>, and other authoritative sources so understand “paraclete,” here applied to Jesus. His mediatorial sacrifice is mentioned in Matthew (Mt 26:28), John (Jn 1:29), Romans (Rom 3:25), and 1 John (1 Jn 1:7; 2:2; 4:10).<\/p>\n<p>Still more significant is the insistence, everywhere in the NT, that man’s knowledge of God, salvation, and hope come through Christ alone. Made poor for our sakes, he died and rose “for us”; our peace, access to God, reconciliation, expiation of sin, grace, truth, prayer, and “all spiritual blessings” are “through him,” “in him,” “through his blood,” and “in his name.” The purpose of God focuses in him; he mediated at Creation and at redemption (Col 1:15, 22); in him all the fullness of God dwells, and the face of Christ reveals God’s glory. No one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son reveals him; no one comes to the Father but by him; neither is there salvation in any other.<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s mediation is the fulfillment and end of all mediation between God and humankind. The book of Hebrews opens with the assertion that Christ surpasses all other mediators—angels, Moses, the Aaronic priesthood. His is a timeless priesthood, like Melchizedek’s. His sacrifice is unrepeatable, “once for all time,” and by it we have been consecrated to God “for all time.” The covenant he established between God and people offers better promises, sacrifice, sanctuary, and hope (Heb 7:19; 8:6; 9:1, 11-15). Christ’s mediation so far excels all others that it can never be superseded; he is priest without rival and forever (cf. 1 Tm 2:5).<\/p>\n<p>Without using the priestly analogy, John emphasizes the same truth. The gulf between divine and human has been crossed, decisively and finally, by the Incarnation. Instead of standing between God and man, Christ unites both within himself by becoming man. Mediating in the beginning at Creation, Christ is himself the Word, which from God’s side mediates God’s mind, embodies God’s message, and conveys God’s power. No one has seen God at any time, but as unique Son and divine, Jesus “expounds” God (Jn 1:18). From the human side, Jesus prays for the disciples (ch 17), offers perfect obedience, lays down his life for his flock, and offers the unblemished sacrifice that bears away the sin of the world.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Reconciliation.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MEDIATE, MEDIATOR The act of an intermediary, go-between, or expert in divine things, not to negotiate agreement or compromise but to approach God on behalf of others, and so to convey desired knowledge and reassurance with divine authority. In the Old Testament Job voices longing for such a mediator (translated here from the LXX): “God is not a mortal like me, so I cannot argue with him or take him to trial. If only there were a mediator who could bring us together, but there is none. The me...","summary_en":"MEDIATE, MEDIATOR The act of an intermediary, go-between, or expert in divine things, not to negotiate agreement or compromise but to approach God on behalf of others, and so to convey desired knowledge and reassurance with divine authority. In the Old Testament Job voices longing for such a mediator (translated here from the LXX): “God is not a mortal like me, so I cannot argue with him or take him to trial. If only there were a mediator who could bring us together, but there is none. The me...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":30014,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Peter, the Apostle","title_en":"Peter, the Apostle","content_ro":"<h3>PETER, <span>The Apostle<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>One of the 12 disciples; rose to prominence both among the disciples during Jesus’ ministry and among the apostles afterwards.<\/p>\n<p>There are actually four forms of Peter’s name in the New Testament: the Hebrew translated into Greek, “Simeon” to “Simon,” and the Aramaic translated into Greek, “Cephas” to “Petros” (meaning “rock”). His given name was Simeon bar-Jonah (Mt 16:17; cf. Jn 1:42), “Simon the son of John,” which was common Semitic nomenclature. It is most likely that “Simon” was not merely the Greek equivalent of “Simeon” but that, having his home in bilingual Galilee, “Simon” was the alternate form he used in dealings with Gentiles. In fact, it was quite common for a cosmopolitan Jew to employ three forms of his name depending on the occasion: Aramaic, Latin, and Greek. The double name “Simon Peter” (or “Simon called Peter”) demonstrates that the second name was a later addition, similar to “Jesus, the Christ.” The number of times that the Aramaic equivalent “Cephas” is used (once in John, four times each in Galatians and 1 Corinthians), as well as its translation into the Greek (not common with proper names), indicates the importance of the secondary name. Both Aramaic and Greek forms mean “the rock,” an obvious indication of Peter’s stature in the early church (see below on Mt 16:18). It is obvious that he was called “Simon” throughout Jesus’ ministry but came to be known as “Peter” more and more in the apostolic age.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Background<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Conversion and Call<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Place among the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>• Peter the Rock<\/p>\n<p>• Peter the Apostle<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Future Ministry<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersBackground\">Peter’s Background<\/p>\n<p>Peter was raised in bilingual Galilee. John 1:44 says that the home of Andrew (his brother) and Peter was Bethsaida, the whereabouts of which is difficult to place archaeologically. The only site about which we know is east of the Jordan in the district called Gaulanitis. Yet John 12:21 places Bethsaida in Galilee; however, it is possible that John is reflecting the popular use of the term “Galilee” rather than the legally correct one. Peter and Andrew had a fishing business centered in Capernaum (Mk 1:21, 29) and perhaps were partners with James and John (Lk 5:10). It is also likely that they intermittently continued in their business while disciples, as indicated in the fishing scene in John 21:1-8.<\/p>\n<p>One difficulty with this is the series of statements saying, “We have left all and followed You” (Mt 19:27; Mk 10:28; Lk 18:28, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The majority of interpreters have given this an absolute sense of “sold” or “left” their business. However, Luke 18:28 occurs in the context of leaving their homes but obviously is not meant in an absolute sense. It seems most likely that the disciples did leave the practice of their fishing businesses to follow Christ, but kept the tools of their trade and returned to their trades when necessary.<\/p>\n<p>They certainly did not abandon their families, as evidenced by Peter, who returned to his home at the end of each tour. The New Testament tells us that Peter was married. In Mark 1:29-31 Jesus heals his mother-in-law, who perhaps was living with Peter. In fact, it is possible that his home became Jesus’ headquarters in Galilee. (Matthew 8:14 may indicate that Jesus dwelt there.) First Corinthians 9:5 says that Peter, along with the other married apostles, often took his wife with him on his missionary journeys. Later tradition speaks of his children (Clement of Alexandria’s <em>Stromateis<\/em> 2.6.52) and says that Peter was present at the martyrdom of his wife (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 3.30.2).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersConversionandCall\">Peter’s Conversion and Call<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s brother, Andrew, was a disciple of John the Baptist, according to John 1:35-40. This follows the witness of John in 1:29-34 and is the second stage of John’s discipleship drama in chapter one—i.e., after bearing witness he now sends his own followers to Jesus. Andrew and the unnamed disciple (perhaps Philip as in Jn 1:43 or the “beloved disciple,” whom many identify with John himself) then “follow” Jesus (a term used often in John for discipleship). The next day Andrew follows the Baptist’s example and finds his brother Simon, saying, “We have found the Messiah” (Jn 1:41, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Peter’s conversion is presupposed in John 1:42, where Simon is brought to Jesus by Andrew and there given a new name.<\/p>\n<p>There are three separate episodes in the Gospels in which Simon is called, and these overlap with three episodes in which he is given the name “Cephas” (“Peter,” which means “rock”) by Jesus. John locates the event in Judea where John the Baptist was baptizing. The synoptic Gospels have two different scenes. The first call takes place at the Sea of Galilee (Mk 1:16-20; Mt 4:18-22). Jesus is walking along the shore and sees Peter and Andrew along with James and John casting their nets into the sea. At this time he calls them to become “fishers of men.” Luke then expands this into a fishing scene (Lk 5:1-11), in which the disciples have fished all night and caught nothing but at the command of Jesus lower their nets and catch an amount of fish so great that the boat starts to sink. The episode concludes exactly like the Markan abbreviated form: Jesus says that from now on they will “catch men,” and as a result they leave everything and follow him.<\/p>\n<p>The second synoptic episode involving Peter’s call (and his new name) is the official choice of the Twelve upon the mountain (Mk 3:13-19 and parallels); in the list of the names we have “Simon he surnamed Peter.” The final occurrence dealing with Peter’s new name is found in Matthew 16:17-19, in connection with Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi.<\/p>\n<p>It is somewhat difficult to harmonize these episodes properly. Were there three different episodes in which Simon was called (Jn 1:42; Mk 1:20; 3:16) and three separate incidents in which he was given the name Cephas\/Peter (Jn 1:42; Mk 3:16; Mt 16:18)? It is attractive to a broad spectrum of academia to assume that one single event, which happened at some indeterminate time toward the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, was later expanded into these diverse traditions. However, a closer examination of the Gospel data does not necessitate such a conclusion. John 1:35-42 is not an institutional scene that connotes an official call. Rather, it describes the first encounter with Jesus and realization regarding his significance. The “renaming” is in the future tense and looks to a later event. Moreover, John deliberately omits most of the crisis events in Jesus’ life (the baptism, the choice of the Twelve, the Transfiguration, the words of institution at the Last Supper, Gethsemane) and replaces them with highly theological scenes that teach the spiritual significance of the events. This is what he has done here.<\/p>\n<p>The same is true of the first synoptic call, i.e., the fishing scene. Again, there is no hint of official ordination to office here but rather a proleptic or prophetic hint of future ministry. This is especially true of the highly theological scene in Luke, which promises abundant results. Again in all three accounts the future tense is employed: “I will make you fishers of men” (Matthew and Mark), “You will catch men” (Luke, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The call in Mark 1:20 and Matthew 4:21 and their reaction (leaving all behind and following Jesus) is the opening gambit that is finalized in the actual institutional scene in Mark 3:13-19 and parallels. The wording does not indicate that these two episodes are doublets, for the actual appointment of the disciples occurs in the second passage. We must differentiate between the original call to one segment (who became the so-called “inner circle” of the Twelve) and the final choice of all the disciples.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersPlaceamongtheTwelve\">Peter’s Place among the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>The prominence of Simon Peter in the Gospels and Acts cannot be disputed. While some have attempted to attribute this to his leadership role in the later church, there is no basis for that in the text of the NT. From the very beginning Simon attained preeminence above the others. In the lists of the Twelve just mentioned, Simon’s name always appears first, and in Matthew 10:2 it introduces his name as “the first.” Moreover, the Twelve are often designated “Peter and those with him” (Mk 1:36; Lk 9:32; 8:45, <span>nkjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Throughout the accounts Peter acted and spoke on behalf of the other disciples. At the Transfiguration it is Peter who wanted to erect tents (Mk 9:5), and he alone had sufficient faith to attempt walking on the water (Mt 14:28-31). It is Peter who asks the Lord to explain his teaching on forgiveness (Mt 18:21) and parables (Mt 15:15; Lk 12:41) and who speaks the disciples’ minds in Matthew 19:27, “Behold, we have left everything and followed you; what’s in it for us?” (paraphrased). The collectors of the temple tax come to Peter as leader of the group (Mt 17:24). As a member of the inner circle (with James and John, possibly Andrew in Mk 13:3) he was often alone with Jesus (at the raising of Jairus’s daughter, Mk 5:37 and parallels; at the Transfiguration, Mk 9:2 and parallels; at Gethsemane, Mk 14:33 and Mt 26:37). Jesus asks Peter and John to prepare the Passover meal in Luke 22:8, and in Mark 14:37 (and Mt 26:40) he directs his rebuke to Peter as representing the others (“Could ye not watch with me one hour?”). Finally, the message of the angel at the tomb as recorded in Mark 16:7 said, “Go your way, tell his disciples and Peter.” Certainly Peter held a very special place among the Twelve.<\/p>\n<p>This was especially evident in the Caesarea Philippi episode (Mk 8:27-33 and parallels). It was Peter whose confession became the high point of the Gospel accounts, “Thou art the Christ” (Luke adds “of God”; Matthew, “the Son of the living God”). After Jesus then spoke of the suffering of the Son of Man, Peter rebuked him, and in Mark’s description Jesus then turned, gazed at all the disciples, and said to Peter, “Get thee behind me, Satan: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but the things that be of men” (v 33, <span>kjv<\/span>). This was obviously directed at them all through Peter.<\/p>\n<p>The portrait of Peter that comes through all four accounts pictures him as impulsive, often rash; he is the first to act and speak his mind and was typified by his enthusiasm for everything in which he had a part. At the sight of Jesus walking on the water, Peter asked that the Lord command him to do the same and then immediately leaped out of the boat and began doing just that. At the Transfiguration, while the others were awed into silence by the appearance of Moses and Elijah, Peter the man of action said, “If thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles” (Mt 17:4, <span>kjv<\/span>). Mark and Luke both add here that Peter did not know what he was saying. Peter’s unguarded and unthinking tendency to protest Jesus’ statements is seen not only at Caesarea Philippi but also at the foot-washing scene in John 13:4-11 when he said first, “You shall never ever wash my feet”; and then after Jesus’ strong retort, “If I do not wash you, you have no part with Me,” he reversed himself completely, stating, “Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and head” (13:8-9, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Finally, in the account of the race to the tomb (Jn 20:2-10), the beloved disciple, reaching the tomb first, paused while Peter immediately and impulsively entered it. Peter was certainly one who “rushed in where angels fear to tread.” However, this very trait aligns him with all of us and may be one of the major reasons why he becomes the representative disciple throughout the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetertheRock\">Peter the Rock<\/p>\n<p>The key to the significance of Simon Peter is obviously the controversial addendum to the Caesarea Philippi episode, found only in Matthew 16:17-19, Jesus’ testimonial to Peter. There are several crucial aspects of this saying. The most important for this study is verse 18, “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church” (<span>kjv<\/span>). There have been many interpretations of this down through history: (1) It refers to Peter as the “rock” or first bishop of the church. This was the Roman Catholic interpretation from the third century on and was employed as a prooftext for apostolic succession, but it is not hinted at anywhere in the context or even in the epistles: it was not a first-century concept. (2) The majority of Protestants since the Reformation have taken this to be a reference to Peter’s statement of faith rather than to Peter himself; but this neglects the wordplay, which is even more pronounced in Aramaic, which has only one form for “Cephas” (rock). (3) An alternative has been to take “this rock” as a reference to Jesus himself, but that is fanciful and is hardly in the context. In conclusion, “this rock” is almost certainly a reference to Peter, but it must be understood in two ways. First, Peter was to become the foundation upon which Christ would build his church, a position clearly attested to in Acts. This does not mean that Peter had an authority above the other apostles. Paul’s rebuke of Peter in Galatians 2:11-14 demonstrates that he was not above them, and at the Jerusalem council in Acts 15 it is James who has the position of leadership. Second, Peter is seen here not merely as an individual but as the representative of the disciples. This view is coming to increasing prominence today. It recognized the Jewish concept of “corporate identity” in which the leader was identified with the corporate body (e.g., the king or high priest representing the nation before God). This concept is also in keeping with Matthew 18:18-20, which passes on the same authority to the church as is here given to Peter. In this view Peter as the rock becomes the first of the building blocks upon which Christ, the chief cornerstone (to continue the metaphor), will build his church (see Eph 2:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>Two other aspects are worthy of note here. First, verse 18 says, “the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” The “gates of hell” is a common Jewish euphemism for death’s inevitable and irrevocable power. Jesus is saying that Satan will not be triumphant over the church, and his sphere of operations, death, will be defeated (cf. 1 Cor 15:26, 54-55). The church would undergo persecution and martyrdom, but the church would be triumphant.<\/p>\n<p>Second, verse 19 promises, “I will give unto thee [singular] the keys of the kingdom,” another statement used of apostolic succession by the medieval church. Again, this must be understood in light of corporate identity; Peter, as the preeminent figure in the early church, here embodies the community in his leadership. The “keys of the kingdom” are in direct contrast to the “gates of hell” (cf. Rv 1:18, “the keys of hell and death” and Rv 3:7, the “key of David”), and this follows the imagery of the building seen in the rock upon which Christ will build his church. Here Peter is given the keys that will unlock the power of the kingdom in building God’s community, the church. The future tense (“will give”) undoubtedly points to the postresurrection period, when that power was unleashed and the church erected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetertheApostle\">Peter the Apostle<\/p>\n<p>Two events led to the new Peter who fills the pages of Acts: his reinstatement described in John 21:15-17 and the resurrection appearance of the Lord, which is never described but alluded to in Luke 24:34 and 1 Corinthians 15:5. His denial was certainly proof that he was not yet able to assume his predicted position as the rock of the church. Both Luke and Paul seem to state that the risen Lord appeared to Simon Peter before the others, which would be fitting in light of his preeminence in the early church. During the Palestinian era, the fifteen-year period prior to the Gentile mission, Peter was the leading figure. The others mentioned in Acts 1–12 are all secondary to Peter, the dominant director of church policy. These include John, who is with Peter in the temple (3:1), the prison (4:13), and Samaria (8:14); Stephen, who was one of the Seven and whose revolutionary preaching led to his martyrdom (chs 6–7); Philip, another of the Seven who proclaimed the gospel in Samaria and to the Ethiopian eunuch (ch 8); Barnabas, who set an example of communal sharing (4:36-37) and was an official delegate to Antioch (11:20-30); Paul, a miraculous convert and witness (9:1-30; 11:25-30; 12:25); and James, who became the first apostolic martyr (12:2). It is Peter who proposes the choice of the 12th disciple (1:15-17), who proclaims the gospel at Pentecost (2:14-40), who utters the healing word (3:6), and who defends the gospel before the Sanhedrin (4:8-12, 19-20; 5:29-32). The episode regarding Ananias and Sapphira is particularly poignant, for here Peter functions as the avenging messenger of God; nowhere is his authority more evident. We would also note his authority in the scene at Samaria concerning the attempt of Simon the Sorcerer to buy the charismatic power (8:18-24). Again, it is Peter whose influence commands the situation. In these two incidents we certainly see the “binding and loosing” jurisdiction (cf. Mt 16:19) exhibited in Peter.<\/p>\n<p>Yet Peter and the church still came under the strictures of their Jewish heritage. The evidence points to a Jewish proselyte self-consciousness on the part of the early church. They viewed themselves as the righteous remnant, living in the age of Messianic fulfillment, but still interpreted themselves in a Jewish sense and conducted their evangelism in the proselyte form of Jewish particularism (i.e., Gentiles could only be converted through Judaism). Two events altered this. First, the Hellenistic Jewish branch of the church rebelled against the Hebrew Christians, which resulted in the appointment of the seven deacons and a change in the orthodox policy of the Palestinian church. Second, this then led to a new preaching ministry, first by Stephen, whose insights ended in his martyrdom and the dispersal of the Hellenistic branch in chapter 8; then by Philip and others, who extended the gospel even further, to the Samaritans and God-fearers. As a further result, Peter and John came to Samaria (8:14), the next significant step toward the Gentile mission. Thus ended the centrality of Jerusalem in the unfolding story.<\/p>\n<p>The two miracles of Peter, at Lydda (the paralytic) and Joppa (raising the dead woman) in Acts 9:32-42, are probably intended to parallel similar miracles of Jesus in Luke’s first work (Lk 5:18-26; 8:49-56). This is part of a major theme in Acts whereby Jesus’ life and ministry are paralleled and continued in the work of the Spirit through the church. Again Peter is seen in a representative role.<\/p>\n<p>The new relationships are extended in two further scenes. First, Peter stays with “Simon, a tanner,” in Joppa, an unclean trade; no pious Jew would knowingly have social contact with such a one. Even more important, God teaches Peter through a dream (10:10-16) that the old dichotomy between clean and unclean has been broken. This then leads Peter to the home of an uncircumcised Gentile, the most serious social taboo for the Jew, and subsequent events force Peter to admit Gentiles into the church without the necessity of Jewish proselyte requirements. The serious consequences of this are seen in the debate that ensued in Jerusalem (Acts 11:2-3) and later at the council (Acts 15:1-21). The centrality of this event is demonstrated in the extent to which Luke reproduces Peter’s speech, which seems to be a repetition of chapter 10 but is meant to highlight this crucial episode. Often forgotten in the significance of this for the early church is the fact that for Luke the Gentile mission begins with Peter, not Paul. He is the one upon whom the salvific act of God descends; and as the leader of the church, he was the first important witness to it.<\/p>\n<p>The persecution of Herod Agrippa (Acts 12:1-4) was likely due to the furor caused by this free intercourse with Gentiles; and it ended the period of Peter’s leadership in Jerusalem. The Jewish people were greatly offended by the new Christian push; and according to Luke in Acts, the idyllic period of popularity, in which the common people supported the church, effectively ceased at this time. Peter’s miraculous release and the dramatic scene at Mary’s house typified the special place of Peter, but the momentum shifts. Peter is forced to flee Jerusalem, and in the interim James arises to leadership (Acts 12:17); at the Jerusalem council it is the latter who has the chair and presents the council’s decision (Acts 15:6-29).<\/p>\n<p>The exact relationship between Peter and the other disciples, especially with the so-called pillars—James and John—and the apostle Paul, cannot be ascertained. The evidence is too vague. Many have thought that indeed there were no truly universal leaders, for the early church was too diverse. However, that is unlikely, and Luke’s portrayal in Acts parallels Paul’s statement in Galatians 2:8 that Peter was the apostle par excellence to the “circumcised” and Paul to the “Gentiles.” They were the universal leaders, while James became the local leader of the Jerusalem eldership. However, neither Peter nor Paul had dominical status similar to that of later popes (i.e., neither was the absolute spokesman of the church and above criticism). So-called emissaries from James could have such an influence on Peter that he would hypocritically change his behavior before Gentiles (Gal 2:12), and Paul could rebuke Peter publicly for doing so (Gal 2:11-14). Paul never claimed authority over the other disciples and even sought their approval and “the right hands of fellowship” for his ministry to the Gentiles (Gal 2:1-10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersFutureMinistry\">Peter’s Future Ministry<\/p>\n<p>We have very little hard evidence for Peter’s other movements. It seems as though Peter gradually turned from leadership to missionary work. However, this is an oversimplification. It is most likely that, following the similar pattern of Paul, he combined the two. The presence of a “Cephas party” at Corinth (1 Cor 1:12; 3:22) may indicate that Peter had spent some time there. This is made even more likely when Paul uses Peter as the main example for taking one’s wife on missionary expeditions (1 Cor 9:5). The “Cephas party” probably consisted of those who were converted under his ministry; it is probable that they were Jewish Christians and opposed the “Paul party” on Jewish-Gentile debates reflected elsewhere in 1 Corinthians.<\/p>\n<p>The First Epistle of Peter was sent to churches in northern Asia Minor—the provinces of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia. The problem here is that there is no hint that Peter had been there and no personal notations in the epistle to demonstrate his acquaintance with these churches. However, it does show that he was very interested in them. In fact, some believe that the reason why Paul was not allowed into this district according to Acts 16:7-8 was that Peter was already ministering there. In short, the question of Peter’s involvement in Asia Minor must remain an open one.<\/p>\n<p>There is no final NT evidence that Peter went to Rome. First Peter 5:13 says that the epistle was sent from “Babylon,” and it is doubtful that this was the literal Babylon, because there is no tradition that Peter ever went there, and Babylon was sparsely populated back then. It is probably a cryptic symbol for Rome, the “Babylon of the West.” It is most likely that the “Babylon” of Revelation 14:8 and 16:19 is also a symbol of Rome. This would fit the strong tradition in the early church that indeed Peter did minister there.<\/p>\n<p>There are four early external witnesses concerning Peter’s death. John 21:18 mentions only the martyrdom of Peter but does not give any hint as to the place. First Clement was written at the end of the first century and reports the martyrdom of Peter and Paul among others. While 1 Clement 5:4 testifies only to the fact and not the place of Peter’s martyrdom, a study of two aspects favors Rome—the reference to a “great multitude” of martyrdoms, which best fits the Neronian persecution, and the phrase “glorious example among us,” which shows that the people of Clement’s own church (Rome) were involved. Ignatius’s letter to the Romans (4:3) also testifies generally to the martyrdom of Peter and Paul, and again the context favors Rome as the place. He says, “I did not command you as did Peter and Paul,” which shows that they had ministries in Rome. The Ascension of Isaiah 4:2-3, a Jewish Christian work of the same period, speaks of Beliar (probably Nero) who martyrs “one of the Twelve,” almost certainly Peter. Therefore the earliest evidence does not explicitly point to Rome as the place of Peter’s death, but that is the most likely hypothesis.<\/p>\n<p>Definite statements to that effect appear toward the end of the second century. Dionysius, bishop of Corinth, in a letter dated c. 170 (preserved in Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 2.25.8) says that Peter and Paul taught together in Italy. At the end of that century Irenaeus says (in <em>Against Heresies<\/em> 2.1-3) that Peter and Paul preached in Rome, and Tertullian in the same general period adds that Peter was martyred “like . . . the Lord” (<em>Scorpiace<\/em> 15). Clement of Alexandria and Origen both allude to Peter’s presence in Rome, and the latter adds the belief that he was “crucified head-downwards” (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 2.15.2; 3.1.2). The tradition that Peter was crucified may be supported in John 21:18: “when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall . . . carry thee wither thou wouldest not” (<span>kjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The fact that Paul’s Epistle to the Romans (c. 55–57) does not mention Peter tells us that he could not have gone there earlier than that. If 1 Peter was written during the Neronian persecution, as those who hold to Petrine authorship believe, he must have gone there sometime in the late 50s or early 60s. Of course, the extent of his ministry in Rome also cannot be known. Some indeed have posited that he had little or no extensive stay in Rome. The facts, as they can be recovered, point to certain tentative conclusions. Peter did have some type of ministry in Rome, though the extent of it cannot be known. However, it is doubtful, in light of the early testimony to his preaching ministry there, that he was merely passing through Rome when caught in Nero’s pogrom. Therefore he most likely spent the last years of his ministry in Rome and there suffered martyrdom under Nero, perhaps by crucifixion.<\/p>\n<p>Simon Peter, along with Paul, was the leading figure in the early church. His impact has been tragically dimmed by the acrimonious debates of Roman Catholic– Protestant circles, but the biblical evidence is clear. He was the leading disciple of Jesus and indeed the “rock” who provided the foundation for the church. As the representative disciple, his enthusiasm and even his weaknesses have made him the supreme example of the developing disciple, one who, through the power of the risen Lord, rose above his faults to become a towering figure on the church scene.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PETER, <span>The Apostle<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>One of the 12 disciples; rose to prominence both among the disciples during Jesus’ ministry and among the apostles afterwards.<\/p>\n<p>There are actually four forms of Peter’s name in the New Testament: the Hebrew translated into Greek, “Simeon” to “Simon,” and the Aramaic translated into Greek, “Cephas” to “Petros” (meaning “rock”). His given name was Simeon bar-Jonah (Mt 16:17; cf. Jn 1:42), “Simon the son of John,” which was common Semitic nomenclature. It is most likely that “Simon” was not merely the Greek equivalent of “Simeon” but that, having his home in bilingual Galilee, “Simon” was the alternate form he used in dealings with Gentiles. In fact, it was quite common for a cosmopolitan Jew to employ three forms of his name depending on the occasion: Aramaic, Latin, and Greek. The double name “Simon Peter” (or “Simon called Peter”) demonstrates that the second name was a later addition, similar to “Jesus, the Christ.” The number of times that the Aramaic equivalent “Cephas” is used (once in John, four times each in Galatians and 1 Corinthians), as well as its translation into the Greek (not common with proper names), indicates the importance of the secondary name. Both Aramaic and Greek forms mean “the rock,” an obvious indication of Peter’s stature in the early church (see below on Mt 16:18). It is obvious that he was called “Simon” throughout Jesus’ ministry but came to be known as “Peter” more and more in the apostolic age.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Background<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Conversion and Call<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Place among the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>• Peter the Rock<\/p>\n<p>• Peter the Apostle<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Future Ministry<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersBackground\">Peter’s Background<\/p>\n<p>Peter was raised in bilingual Galilee. John 1:44 says that the home of Andrew (his brother) and Peter was Bethsaida, the whereabouts of which is difficult to place archaeologically. The only site about which we know is east of the Jordan in the district called Gaulanitis. Yet John 12:21 places Bethsaida in Galilee; however, it is possible that John is reflecting the popular use of the term “Galilee” rather than the legally correct one. Peter and Andrew had a fishing business centered in Capernaum (Mk 1:21, 29) and perhaps were partners with James and John (Lk 5:10). It is also likely that they intermittently continued in their business while disciples, as indicated in the fishing scene in John 21:1-8.<\/p>\n<p>One difficulty with this is the series of statements saying, “We have left all and followed You” (Mt 19:27; Mk 10:28; Lk 18:28, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The majority of interpreters have given this an absolute sense of “sold” or “left” their business. However, Luke 18:28 occurs in the context of leaving their homes but obviously is not meant in an absolute sense. It seems most likely that the disciples did leave the practice of their fishing businesses to follow Christ, but kept the tools of their trade and returned to their trades when necessary.<\/p>\n<p>They certainly did not abandon their families, as evidenced by Peter, who returned to his home at the end of each tour. The New Testament tells us that Peter was married. In Mark 1:29-31 Jesus heals his mother-in-law, who perhaps was living with Peter. In fact, it is possible that his home became Jesus’ headquarters in Galilee. (Matthew 8:14 may indicate that Jesus dwelt there.) First Corinthians 9:5 says that Peter, along with the other married apostles, often took his wife with him on his missionary journeys. Later tradition speaks of his children (Clement of Alexandria’s <em>Stromateis<\/em> 2.6.52) and says that Peter was present at the martyrdom of his wife (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 3.30.2).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersConversionandCall\">Peter’s Conversion and Call<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s brother, Andrew, was a disciple of John the Baptist, according to John 1:35-40. This follows the witness of John in 1:29-34 and is the second stage of John’s discipleship drama in chapter one—i.e., after bearing witness he now sends his own followers to Jesus. Andrew and the unnamed disciple (perhaps Philip as in Jn 1:43 or the “beloved disciple,” whom many identify with John himself) then “follow” Jesus (a term used often in John for discipleship). The next day Andrew follows the Baptist’s example and finds his brother Simon, saying, “We have found the Messiah” (Jn 1:41, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Peter’s conversion is presupposed in John 1:42, where Simon is brought to Jesus by Andrew and there given a new name.<\/p>\n<p>There are three separate episodes in the Gospels in which Simon is called, and these overlap with three episodes in which he is given the name “Cephas” (“Peter,” which means “rock”) by Jesus. John locates the event in Judea where John the Baptist was baptizing. The synoptic Gospels have two different scenes. The first call takes place at the Sea of Galilee (Mk 1:16-20; Mt 4:18-22). Jesus is walking along the shore and sees Peter and Andrew along with James and John casting their nets into the sea. At this time he calls them to become “fishers of men.” Luke then expands this into a fishing scene (Lk 5:1-11), in which the disciples have fished all night and caught nothing but at the command of Jesus lower their nets and catch an amount of fish so great that the boat starts to sink. The episode concludes exactly like the Markan abbreviated form: Jesus says that from now on they will “catch men,” and as a result they leave everything and follow him.<\/p>\n<p>The second synoptic episode involving Peter’s call (and his new name) is the official choice of the Twelve upon the mountain (Mk 3:13-19 and parallels); in the list of the names we have “Simon he surnamed Peter.” The final occurrence dealing with Peter’s new name is found in Matthew 16:17-19, in connection with Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi.<\/p>\n<p>It is somewhat difficult to harmonize these episodes properly. Were there three different episodes in which Simon was called (Jn 1:42; Mk 1:20; 3:16) and three separate incidents in which he was given the name Cephas\/Peter (Jn 1:42; Mk 3:16; Mt 16:18)? It is attractive to a broad spectrum of academia to assume that one single event, which happened at some indeterminate time toward the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, was later expanded into these diverse traditions. However, a closer examination of the Gospel data does not necessitate such a conclusion. John 1:35-42 is not an institutional scene that connotes an official call. Rather, it describes the first encounter with Jesus and realization regarding his significance. The “renaming” is in the future tense and looks to a later event. Moreover, John deliberately omits most of the crisis events in Jesus’ life (the baptism, the choice of the Twelve, the Transfiguration, the words of institution at the Last Supper, Gethsemane) and replaces them with highly theological scenes that teach the spiritual significance of the events. This is what he has done here.<\/p>\n<p>The same is true of the first synoptic call, i.e., the fishing scene. Again, there is no hint of official ordination to office here but rather a proleptic or prophetic hint of future ministry. This is especially true of the highly theological scene in Luke, which promises abundant results. Again in all three accounts the future tense is employed: “I will make you fishers of men” (Matthew and Mark), “You will catch men” (Luke, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The call in Mark 1:20 and Matthew 4:21 and their reaction (leaving all behind and following Jesus) is the opening gambit that is finalized in the actual institutional scene in Mark 3:13-19 and parallels. The wording does not indicate that these two episodes are doublets, for the actual appointment of the disciples occurs in the second passage. We must differentiate between the original call to one segment (who became the so-called “inner circle” of the Twelve) and the final choice of all the disciples.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersPlaceamongtheTwelve\">Peter’s Place among the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>The prominence of Simon Peter in the Gospels and Acts cannot be disputed. While some have attempted to attribute this to his leadership role in the later church, there is no basis for that in the text of the NT. From the very beginning Simon attained preeminence above the others. In the lists of the Twelve just mentioned, Simon’s name always appears first, and in Matthew 10:2 it introduces his name as “the first.” Moreover, the Twelve are often designated “Peter and those with him” (Mk 1:36; Lk 9:32; 8:45, <span>nkjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Throughout the accounts Peter acted and spoke on behalf of the other disciples. At the Transfiguration it is Peter who wanted to erect tents (Mk 9:5), and he alone had sufficient faith to attempt walking on the water (Mt 14:28-31). It is Peter who asks the Lord to explain his teaching on forgiveness (Mt 18:21) and parables (Mt 15:15; Lk 12:41) and who speaks the disciples’ minds in Matthew 19:27, “Behold, we have left everything and followed you; what’s in it for us?” (paraphrased). The collectors of the temple tax come to Peter as leader of the group (Mt 17:24). As a member of the inner circle (with James and John, possibly Andrew in Mk 13:3) he was often alone with Jesus (at the raising of Jairus’s daughter, Mk 5:37 and parallels; at the Transfiguration, Mk 9:2 and parallels; at Gethsemane, Mk 14:33 and Mt 26:37). Jesus asks Peter and John to prepare the Passover meal in Luke 22:8, and in Mark 14:37 (and Mt 26:40) he directs his rebuke to Peter as representing the others (“Could ye not watch with me one hour?”). Finally, the message of the angel at the tomb as recorded in Mark 16:7 said, “Go your way, tell his disciples and Peter.” Certainly Peter held a very special place among the Twelve.<\/p>\n<p>This was especially evident in the Caesarea Philippi episode (Mk 8:27-33 and parallels). It was Peter whose confession became the high point of the Gospel accounts, “Thou art the Christ” (Luke adds “of God”; Matthew, “the Son of the living God”). After Jesus then spoke of the suffering of the Son of Man, Peter rebuked him, and in Mark’s description Jesus then turned, gazed at all the disciples, and said to Peter, “Get thee behind me, Satan: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but the things that be of men” (v 33, <span>kjv<\/span>). This was obviously directed at them all through Peter.<\/p>\n<p>The portrait of Peter that comes through all four accounts pictures him as impulsive, often rash; he is the first to act and speak his mind and was typified by his enthusiasm for everything in which he had a part. At the sight of Jesus walking on the water, Peter asked that the Lord command him to do the same and then immediately leaped out of the boat and began doing just that. At the Transfiguration, while the others were awed into silence by the appearance of Moses and Elijah, Peter the man of action said, “If thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles” (Mt 17:4, <span>kjv<\/span>). Mark and Luke both add here that Peter did not know what he was saying. Peter’s unguarded and unthinking tendency to protest Jesus’ statements is seen not only at Caesarea Philippi but also at the foot-washing scene in John 13:4-11 when he said first, “You shall never ever wash my feet”; and then after Jesus’ strong retort, “If I do not wash you, you have no part with Me,” he reversed himself completely, stating, “Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and head” (13:8-9, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Finally, in the account of the race to the tomb (Jn 20:2-10), the beloved disciple, reaching the tomb first, paused while Peter immediately and impulsively entered it. Peter was certainly one who “rushed in where angels fear to tread.” However, this very trait aligns him with all of us and may be one of the major reasons why he becomes the representative disciple throughout the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetertheRock\">Peter the Rock<\/p>\n<p>The key to the significance of Simon Peter is obviously the controversial addendum to the Caesarea Philippi episode, found only in Matthew 16:17-19, Jesus’ testimonial to Peter. There are several crucial aspects of this saying. The most important for this study is verse 18, “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church” (<span>kjv<\/span>). There have been many interpretations of this down through history: (1) It refers to Peter as the “rock” or first bishop of the church. This was the Roman Catholic interpretation from the third century on and was employed as a prooftext for apostolic succession, but it is not hinted at anywhere in the context or even in the epistles: it was not a first-century concept. (2) The majority of Protestants since the Reformation have taken this to be a reference to Peter’s statement of faith rather than to Peter himself; but this neglects the wordplay, which is even more pronounced in Aramaic, which has only one form for “Cephas” (rock). (3) An alternative has been to take “this rock” as a reference to Jesus himself, but that is fanciful and is hardly in the context. In conclusion, “this rock” is almost certainly a reference to Peter, but it must be understood in two ways. First, Peter was to become the foundation upon which Christ would build his church, a position clearly attested to in Acts. This does not mean that Peter had an authority above the other apostles. Paul’s rebuke of Peter in Galatians 2:11-14 demonstrates that he was not above them, and at the Jerusalem council in Acts 15 it is James who has the position of leadership. Second, Peter is seen here not merely as an individual but as the representative of the disciples. This view is coming to increasing prominence today. It recognized the Jewish concept of “corporate identity” in which the leader was identified with the corporate body (e.g., the king or high priest representing the nation before God). This concept is also in keeping with Matthew 18:18-20, which passes on the same authority to the church as is here given to Peter. In this view Peter as the rock becomes the first of the building blocks upon which Christ, the chief cornerstone (to continue the metaphor), will build his church (see Eph 2:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>Two other aspects are worthy of note here. First, verse 18 says, “the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” The “gates of hell” is a common Jewish euphemism for death’s inevitable and irrevocable power. Jesus is saying that Satan will not be triumphant over the church, and his sphere of operations, death, will be defeated (cf. 1 Cor 15:26, 54-55). The church would undergo persecution and martyrdom, but the church would be triumphant.<\/p>\n<p>Second, verse 19 promises, “I will give unto thee [singular] the keys of the kingdom,” another statement used of apostolic succession by the medieval church. Again, this must be understood in light of corporate identity; Peter, as the preeminent figure in the early church, here embodies the community in his leadership. The “keys of the kingdom” are in direct contrast to the “gates of hell” (cf. Rv 1:18, “the keys of hell and death” and Rv 3:7, the “key of David”), and this follows the imagery of the building seen in the rock upon which Christ will build his church. Here Peter is given the keys that will unlock the power of the kingdom in building God’s community, the church. The future tense (“will give”) undoubtedly points to the postresurrection period, when that power was unleashed and the church erected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetertheApostle\">Peter the Apostle<\/p>\n<p>Two events led to the new Peter who fills the pages of Acts: his reinstatement described in John 21:15-17 and the resurrection appearance of the Lord, which is never described but alluded to in Luke 24:34 and 1 Corinthians 15:5. His denial was certainly proof that he was not yet able to assume his predicted position as the rock of the church. Both Luke and Paul seem to state that the risen Lord appeared to Simon Peter before the others, which would be fitting in light of his preeminence in the early church. During the Palestinian era, the fifteen-year period prior to the Gentile mission, Peter was the leading figure. The others mentioned in Acts 1–12 are all secondary to Peter, the dominant director of church policy. These include John, who is with Peter in the temple (3:1), the prison (4:13), and Samaria (8:14); Stephen, who was one of the Seven and whose revolutionary preaching led to his martyrdom (chs 6–7); Philip, another of the Seven who proclaimed the gospel in Samaria and to the Ethiopian eunuch (ch 8); Barnabas, who set an example of communal sharing (4:36-37) and was an official delegate to Antioch (11:20-30); Paul, a miraculous convert and witness (9:1-30; 11:25-30; 12:25); and James, who became the first apostolic martyr (12:2). It is Peter who proposes the choice of the 12th disciple (1:15-17), who proclaims the gospel at Pentecost (2:14-40), who utters the healing word (3:6), and who defends the gospel before the Sanhedrin (4:8-12, 19-20; 5:29-32). The episode regarding Ananias and Sapphira is particularly poignant, for here Peter functions as the avenging messenger of God; nowhere is his authority more evident. We would also note his authority in the scene at Samaria concerning the attempt of Simon the Sorcerer to buy the charismatic power (8:18-24). Again, it is Peter whose influence commands the situation. In these two incidents we certainly see the “binding and loosing” jurisdiction (cf. Mt 16:19) exhibited in Peter.<\/p>\n<p>Yet Peter and the church still came under the strictures of their Jewish heritage. The evidence points to a Jewish proselyte self-consciousness on the part of the early church. They viewed themselves as the righteous remnant, living in the age of Messianic fulfillment, but still interpreted themselves in a Jewish sense and conducted their evangelism in the proselyte form of Jewish particularism (i.e., Gentiles could only be converted through Judaism). Two events altered this. First, the Hellenistic Jewish branch of the church rebelled against the Hebrew Christians, which resulted in the appointment of the seven deacons and a change in the orthodox policy of the Palestinian church. Second, this then led to a new preaching ministry, first by Stephen, whose insights ended in his martyrdom and the dispersal of the Hellenistic branch in chapter 8; then by Philip and others, who extended the gospel even further, to the Samaritans and God-fearers. As a further result, Peter and John came to Samaria (8:14), the next significant step toward the Gentile mission. Thus ended the centrality of Jerusalem in the unfolding story.<\/p>\n<p>The two miracles of Peter, at Lydda (the paralytic) and Joppa (raising the dead woman) in Acts 9:32-42, are probably intended to parallel similar miracles of Jesus in Luke’s first work (Lk 5:18-26; 8:49-56). This is part of a major theme in Acts whereby Jesus’ life and ministry are paralleled and continued in the work of the Spirit through the church. Again Peter is seen in a representative role.<\/p>\n<p>The new relationships are extended in two further scenes. First, Peter stays with “Simon, a tanner,” in Joppa, an unclean trade; no pious Jew would knowingly have social contact with such a one. Even more important, God teaches Peter through a dream (10:10-16) that the old dichotomy between clean and unclean has been broken. This then leads Peter to the home of an uncircumcised Gentile, the most serious social taboo for the Jew, and subsequent events force Peter to admit Gentiles into the church without the necessity of Jewish proselyte requirements. The serious consequences of this are seen in the debate that ensued in Jerusalem (Acts 11:2-3) and later at the council (Acts 15:1-21). The centrality of this event is demonstrated in the extent to which Luke reproduces Peter’s speech, which seems to be a repetition of chapter 10 but is meant to highlight this crucial episode. Often forgotten in the significance of this for the early church is the fact that for Luke the Gentile mission begins with Peter, not Paul. He is the one upon whom the salvific act of God descends; and as the leader of the church, he was the first important witness to it.<\/p>\n<p>The persecution of Herod Agrippa (Acts 12:1-4) was likely due to the furor caused by this free intercourse with Gentiles; and it ended the period of Peter’s leadership in Jerusalem. The Jewish people were greatly offended by the new Christian push; and according to Luke in Acts, the idyllic period of popularity, in which the common people supported the church, effectively ceased at this time. Peter’s miraculous release and the dramatic scene at Mary’s house typified the special place of Peter, but the momentum shifts. Peter is forced to flee Jerusalem, and in the interim James arises to leadership (Acts 12:17); at the Jerusalem council it is the latter who has the chair and presents the council’s decision (Acts 15:6-29).<\/p>\n<p>The exact relationship between Peter and the other disciples, especially with the so-called pillars—James and John—and the apostle Paul, cannot be ascertained. The evidence is too vague. Many have thought that indeed there were no truly universal leaders, for the early church was too diverse. However, that is unlikely, and Luke’s portrayal in Acts parallels Paul’s statement in Galatians 2:8 that Peter was the apostle par excellence to the “circumcised” and Paul to the “Gentiles.” They were the universal leaders, while James became the local leader of the Jerusalem eldership. However, neither Peter nor Paul had dominical status similar to that of later popes (i.e., neither was the absolute spokesman of the church and above criticism). So-called emissaries from James could have such an influence on Peter that he would hypocritically change his behavior before Gentiles (Gal 2:12), and Paul could rebuke Peter publicly for doing so (Gal 2:11-14). Paul never claimed authority over the other disciples and even sought their approval and “the right hands of fellowship” for his ministry to the Gentiles (Gal 2:1-10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersFutureMinistry\">Peter’s Future Ministry<\/p>\n<p>We have very little hard evidence for Peter’s other movements. It seems as though Peter gradually turned from leadership to missionary work. However, this is an oversimplification. It is most likely that, following the similar pattern of Paul, he combined the two. The presence of a “Cephas party” at Corinth (1 Cor 1:12; 3:22) may indicate that Peter had spent some time there. This is made even more likely when Paul uses Peter as the main example for taking one’s wife on missionary expeditions (1 Cor 9:5). The “Cephas party” probably consisted of those who were converted under his ministry; it is probable that they were Jewish Christians and opposed the “Paul party” on Jewish-Gentile debates reflected elsewhere in 1 Corinthians.<\/p>\n<p>The First Epistle of Peter was sent to churches in northern Asia Minor—the provinces of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia. The problem here is that there is no hint that Peter had been there and no personal notations in the epistle to demonstrate his acquaintance with these churches. However, it does show that he was very interested in them. In fact, some believe that the reason why Paul was not allowed into this district according to Acts 16:7-8 was that Peter was already ministering there. In short, the question of Peter’s involvement in Asia Minor must remain an open one.<\/p>\n<p>There is no final NT evidence that Peter went to Rome. First Peter 5:13 says that the epistle was sent from “Babylon,” and it is doubtful that this was the literal Babylon, because there is no tradition that Peter ever went there, and Babylon was sparsely populated back then. It is probably a cryptic symbol for Rome, the “Babylon of the West.” It is most likely that the “Babylon” of Revelation 14:8 and 16:19 is also a symbol of Rome. This would fit the strong tradition in the early church that indeed Peter did minister there.<\/p>\n<p>There are four early external witnesses concerning Peter’s death. John 21:18 mentions only the martyrdom of Peter but does not give any hint as to the place. First Clement was written at the end of the first century and reports the martyrdom of Peter and Paul among others. While 1 Clement 5:4 testifies only to the fact and not the place of Peter’s martyrdom, a study of two aspects favors Rome—the reference to a “great multitude” of martyrdoms, which best fits the Neronian persecution, and the phrase “glorious example among us,” which shows that the people of Clement’s own church (Rome) were involved. Ignatius’s letter to the Romans (4:3) also testifies generally to the martyrdom of Peter and Paul, and again the context favors Rome as the place. He says, “I did not command you as did Peter and Paul,” which shows that they had ministries in Rome. The Ascension of Isaiah 4:2-3, a Jewish Christian work of the same period, speaks of Beliar (probably Nero) who martyrs “one of the Twelve,” almost certainly Peter. Therefore the earliest evidence does not explicitly point to Rome as the place of Peter’s death, but that is the most likely hypothesis.<\/p>\n<p>Definite statements to that effect appear toward the end of the second century. Dionysius, bishop of Corinth, in a letter dated c. 170 (preserved in Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 2.25.8) says that Peter and Paul taught together in Italy. At the end of that century Irenaeus says (in <em>Against Heresies<\/em> 2.1-3) that Peter and Paul preached in Rome, and Tertullian in the same general period adds that Peter was martyred “like . . . the Lord” (<em>Scorpiace<\/em> 15). Clement of Alexandria and Origen both allude to Peter’s presence in Rome, and the latter adds the belief that he was “crucified head-downwards” (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 2.15.2; 3.1.2). The tradition that Peter was crucified may be supported in John 21:18: “when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall . . . carry thee wither thou wouldest not” (<span>kjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The fact that Paul’s Epistle to the Romans (c. 55–57) does not mention Peter tells us that he could not have gone there earlier than that. If 1 Peter was written during the Neronian persecution, as those who hold to Petrine authorship believe, he must have gone there sometime in the late 50s or early 60s. Of course, the extent of his ministry in Rome also cannot be known. Some indeed have posited that he had little or no extensive stay in Rome. The facts, as they can be recovered, point to certain tentative conclusions. Peter did have some type of ministry in Rome, though the extent of it cannot be known. However, it is doubtful, in light of the early testimony to his preaching ministry there, that he was merely passing through Rome when caught in Nero’s pogrom. Therefore he most likely spent the last years of his ministry in Rome and there suffered martyrdom under Nero, perhaps by crucifixion.<\/p>\n<p>Simon Peter, along with Paul, was the leading figure in the early church. His impact has been tragically dimmed by the acrimonious debates of Roman Catholic– Protestant circles, but the biblical evidence is clear. He was the leading disciple of Jesus and indeed the “rock” who provided the foundation for the church. As the representative disciple, his enthusiasm and even his weaknesses have made him the supreme example of the developing disciple, one who, through the power of the risen Lord, rose above his faults to become a towering figure on the church scene.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PETER, The Apostle One of the 12 disciples; rose to prominence both among the disciples during Jesus’ ministry and among the apostles afterwards. There are actually four forms of Peter’s name in the New Testament: the Hebrew translated into Greek, “Simeon” to “Simon,” and the Aramaic translated into Greek, “Cephas” to “Petros” (meaning “rock”). His given name was Simeon bar-Jonah (Mt 16:17; cf. Jn 1:42), “Simon the son of John,” which was common Semitic nomenclature. It is most likely that “S...","summary_en":"PETER, The Apostle One of the 12 disciples; rose to prominence both among the disciples during Jesus’ ministry and among the apostles afterwards. There are actually four forms of Peter’s name in the New Testament: the Hebrew translated into Greek, “Simeon” to “Simon,” and the Aramaic translated into Greek, “Cephas” to “Petros” (meaning “rock”). His given name was Simeon bar-Jonah (Mt 16:17; cf. Jn 1:42), “Simon the son of John,” which was common Semitic nomenclature. It is most likely that “S...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":38725,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Worship","title_en":"Worship","content_ro":"<h3>WORSHIP<\/h3>\n<p>Expression of reverence and adoration of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WorshipintheOldTestament\">Worship in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The 1,500 years from the days of Abraham to the time of Ezra (c. 1900–450 <span>BC<\/span>) saw many significant changes in the form of worship in ancient Israel. Abraham, the wandering nomad, built altars and offered sacrifices wherever God appeared to him. In Moses’ time the tabernacle served as a portable sanctuary for the Israelite tribes journeying through the wilderness. Solomon built a temple in Jerusalem that lasted more than three centuries until its destruction by the Babylonians in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. When the Jews returned from exile, they built a new temple, which was later renovated and enlarged by Herod the Great. Though all the temple buildings were destroyed by the Romans in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the foundations remained. Jews still pray by the Western Wall (called the Wailing Wall).<\/p>\n<p>If the form of worship changed with times and situations, its heart and center did not. God revealed himself to Abraham, promising that his children would inherit the land of Canaan. Abraham demonstrated his faith through prayer and sacrifice. Throughout the biblical period listening to God’s Word, prayer, and sacrifice constituted the essence of worship. The promises to Abraham were constantly recalled as the basis of Israel’s existence as a nation and its right to the land of Canaan.<\/p>\n<p>From time to time every family visited the temple in Jerusalem. Eight days after a baby boy was born, he was circumcised to mark his membership in Israel. Then, a month or two later, the baby’s mother went to the temple to offer sacrifice (Lv 12; cf. Lk 2:22-24).<\/p>\n<p>Animals were sacrificed in the lambing and calving season. The first lamb or calf born to every ewe or cow was presented in sacrifice (Ex 22:30). Similarly, at the beginning of the harvest season, a basket of the first fruits was offered, and at the end, a tenth of all the harvest, the tithe, was given to the priests as God’s representatives (Nm 18:21-32). Deuteronomy 26:5-15 gives a typical prayer for use on such occasions.<\/p>\n<p>Sometimes a person would decide to offer a sacrifice for more personal reasons. In a crisis, vows could be made and sealed with a sacrifice (Gn 28:18-22; 1 Sm 1:10-11). Then when the prayer was answered, a second sacrifice was customarily offered (Gn 35:3, 14; 1 Sm 1:24-25). Serious sin or serious sickness were also occasions for sacrifice (Lv 4–5, 13–15).<\/p>\n<p>The worshiper brought the animal into the temple court. Standing before the priest, he placed one hand on its head, thereby identifying himself with the animal, and confessed his sin or explained the reason for offering the sacrifice. Then the worshiper killed the animal and cut it up for the priest to burn on the great bronze altar. Some sacrifices (burnt offerings) involved the whole animal being burnt on the altar. In others, some of the meat was set aside for the priests, while the rest was shared by the worshiper and his family. But in every case the worshiper killed the animal from his own flock with his own hands. These sacrifices expressed in a vivid and tangible way the cost of sin and the worshiper’s responsibility. As the worshiper killed the animal, he recalled that sin would have caused his own death, had God not provided an escape through animal sacrifice.<\/p>\n<p>Three times a year all adult men went to the temple to celebrate the national festivals (Ex 23:17; Dt 16:16): Passover (held in April), the Feast of Weeks (held in May), and the Feast of Booths (in October). When possible, the whole family accompanied the men. But if they lived a long way from Jerusalem, they would go up for only one of the festivals (1 Sm 1:3; Lk 2:41).<\/p>\n<p>These festivals were tremendous occasions. Hundreds of thousands of people converged on Jerusalem. They would stay with relatives or camp in tents outside the city. The temple courts would be thronged with worshipers. The temple choirs sang psalms appropriate for the festival, while the priests and Levites offered hundreds (at Passover, thousands) of animals in sacrifice. Groups of worshipers carried away with emotion would break forth into dancing. Those of more sober temperament were content to join in the singing or simply pray quietly.<\/p>\n<p>The major festivals were joyful occasions, for they celebrated the deliverance of Israel from Egypt. At Passover each family ate roasted lamb and bitter herbs to reenact the last meal their forefathers ate before leaving Egypt (Ex 12). At the Feast of Booths, they built shelters of branches and lived in them for a week, as a reminder that the Israelites camped in tents during the 40 years of wandering in the wilderness (Lv 23:39-43). These great festivals served as reminders of how God had delivered them from slavery in Egypt and had given them the land of Canaan as he had promised to Abraham.<\/p>\n<p>Each of these three festivals lasted a week, but there was one day in the year that was totally different, the Day of Atonement, when everyone fasted and mourned for their sins. On this day the high priest confessed the nation’s sins as he pressed his hand on the head of a goat. Then the goat was led away into the wilderness, symbolizing the removal of sin from the people (Lv 16).<\/p>\n<p>Sometime after the destruction of the first temple, synagogues developed for public worship. The services were more like modern church worship, consisting exclusively of prayer, Bible reading, and preaching. There were no sacrifices made in the synagogues. When the second temple was destroyed in <span>AD<\/span> 70, synagogues became the only places where Jews could worship in public. Then there were no more sacrifices at all. The NT pictures this as fitting, for Jesus was the true Lamb of God (Jn 1:29); because of his death, there is no need for further animal sacrifice (Heb 10:11-12).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WorshipintheNewTestament\">Worship in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The Jews had become far too dependent on a physical place, the temple, for their worship. When Jesus arrived on the scene, he proclaimed that he himself was the temple of God; in resurrection, he would provide the spiritual dwelling where God the Spirit and people, in spirit, could have spiritual communion (see Mt 12:6; Jn 2:19-22). In other words, worship would no longer be in a place but in a person—through Jesus Christ and his Spirit the worshipers could come directly to God (see Jn 14:6; Heb 10:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>This shift in worship—from physical to spiritual—is the theme of John 4, a chapter that recounts Jesus’ visit to the Samaritans. After Jesus’ encounter with the Samaritan woman, she acknowledged that he must be a prophet, and then she launched into a discussion concerning the religious debate between the Jews and the Samaritans over which place of worship was the right one—Jerusalem or Mt Gerizim. The Samaritans had set up a place for worship on Mt Gerizim in accordance with Deuteronomy 11:26-29 and 27:1-8, while the Jews had followed David and Solomon in making Jerusalem the center of Jewish worship. The Scriptures affirmed Jerusalem as the true center for worship (Dt 12:5; 2 Chr 6:6; 7:12; Ps 78:67-68). But Jesus told her that a new age had come in which the issue no longer concerned a physical site. God the Father would no longer be worshiped in either place. A new age had come in which the true worshipers (Jew, Samaritan, or Gentile) must worship the Father in spirit and in truth.<\/p>\n<p>“In spirit” corresponds to Jerusalem, and “in truth” corresponds to the Samaritans’ unknowledgeable ideas of worship, God, etc. Formerly, God was worshiped in Jerusalem, but now the true Jerusalem would be in a person’s spirit. Indeed, the church is called “the habitation of God in spirit” (Eph 2:22). True worship required a people to contact God, the Spirit, in their spirit, as well as a people who knew the truth. New Testament worship must be in spirit and in truth. Since “God is Spirit,” he must be worshiped in spirit. Human beings possess a human spirit, the nature of which corresponds to God’s nature, which is spirit. Therefore, people can have fellowship with God and worship God in the same sphere that God exists in.<\/p>\n<p>In a sense, John 4 anticipates Revelation 21 and 22, where God provides the rivers of the water of life to all the believers and where the Lamb and God are the temple in the New Jerusalem. The believers receive life from God and they worship in God. There is a profound, even mystical connection between drinking of the Spirit and worshiping God in the Spirit (see 1 Cor 12:13). This is also described in Ezekiel 47, which pictures the river flowing from God’s temple as a symbol of God’s never-ending supply. In John 4, Jesus provides the living waters to all who receive the gift of God, and he directs people to a new temple, a spiritual one, where God is worshiped in spirit.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>WORSHIP<\/h3>\n<p>Expression of reverence and adoration of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WorshipintheOldTestament\">Worship in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The 1,500 years from the days of Abraham to the time of Ezra (c. 1900–450 <span>BC<\/span>) saw many significant changes in the form of worship in ancient Israel. Abraham, the wandering nomad, built altars and offered sacrifices wherever God appeared to him. In Moses’ time the tabernacle served as a portable sanctuary for the Israelite tribes journeying through the wilderness. Solomon built a temple in Jerusalem that lasted more than three centuries until its destruction by the Babylonians in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. When the Jews returned from exile, they built a new temple, which was later renovated and enlarged by Herod the Great. Though all the temple buildings were destroyed by the Romans in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the foundations remained. Jews still pray by the Western Wall (called the Wailing Wall).<\/p>\n<p>If the form of worship changed with times and situations, its heart and center did not. God revealed himself to Abraham, promising that his children would inherit the land of Canaan. Abraham demonstrated his faith through prayer and sacrifice. Throughout the biblical period listening to God’s Word, prayer, and sacrifice constituted the essence of worship. The promises to Abraham were constantly recalled as the basis of Israel’s existence as a nation and its right to the land of Canaan.<\/p>\n<p>From time to time every family visited the temple in Jerusalem. Eight days after a baby boy was born, he was circumcised to mark his membership in Israel. Then, a month or two later, the baby’s mother went to the temple to offer sacrifice (Lv 12; cf. Lk 2:22-24).<\/p>\n<p>Animals were sacrificed in the lambing and calving season. The first lamb or calf born to every ewe or cow was presented in sacrifice (Ex 22:30). Similarly, at the beginning of the harvest season, a basket of the first fruits was offered, and at the end, a tenth of all the harvest, the tithe, was given to the priests as God’s representatives (Nm 18:21-32). Deuteronomy 26:5-15 gives a typical prayer for use on such occasions.<\/p>\n<p>Sometimes a person would decide to offer a sacrifice for more personal reasons. In a crisis, vows could be made and sealed with a sacrifice (Gn 28:18-22; 1 Sm 1:10-11). Then when the prayer was answered, a second sacrifice was customarily offered (Gn 35:3, 14; 1 Sm 1:24-25). Serious sin or serious sickness were also occasions for sacrifice (Lv 4–5, 13–15).<\/p>\n<p>The worshiper brought the animal into the temple court. Standing before the priest, he placed one hand on its head, thereby identifying himself with the animal, and confessed his sin or explained the reason for offering the sacrifice. Then the worshiper killed the animal and cut it up for the priest to burn on the great bronze altar. Some sacrifices (burnt offerings) involved the whole animal being burnt on the altar. In others, some of the meat was set aside for the priests, while the rest was shared by the worshiper and his family. But in every case the worshiper killed the animal from his own flock with his own hands. These sacrifices expressed in a vivid and tangible way the cost of sin and the worshiper’s responsibility. As the worshiper killed the animal, he recalled that sin would have caused his own death, had God not provided an escape through animal sacrifice.<\/p>\n<p>Three times a year all adult men went to the temple to celebrate the national festivals (Ex 23:17; Dt 16:16): Passover (held in April), the Feast of Weeks (held in May), and the Feast of Booths (in October). When possible, the whole family accompanied the men. But if they lived a long way from Jerusalem, they would go up for only one of the festivals (1 Sm 1:3; Lk 2:41).<\/p>\n<p>These festivals were tremendous occasions. Hundreds of thousands of people converged on Jerusalem. They would stay with relatives or camp in tents outside the city. The temple courts would be thronged with worshipers. The temple choirs sang psalms appropriate for the festival, while the priests and Levites offered hundreds (at Passover, thousands) of animals in sacrifice. Groups of worshipers carried away with emotion would break forth into dancing. Those of more sober temperament were content to join in the singing or simply pray quietly.<\/p>\n<p>The major festivals were joyful occasions, for they celebrated the deliverance of Israel from Egypt. At Passover each family ate roasted lamb and bitter herbs to reenact the last meal their forefathers ate before leaving Egypt (Ex 12). At the Feast of Booths, they built shelters of branches and lived in them for a week, as a reminder that the Israelites camped in tents during the 40 years of wandering in the wilderness (Lv 23:39-43). These great festivals served as reminders of how God had delivered them from slavery in Egypt and had given them the land of Canaan as he had promised to Abraham.<\/p>\n<p>Each of these three festivals lasted a week, but there was one day in the year that was totally different, the Day of Atonement, when everyone fasted and mourned for their sins. On this day the high priest confessed the nation’s sins as he pressed his hand on the head of a goat. Then the goat was led away into the wilderness, symbolizing the removal of sin from the people (Lv 16).<\/p>\n<p>Sometime after the destruction of the first temple, synagogues developed for public worship. The services were more like modern church worship, consisting exclusively of prayer, Bible reading, and preaching. There were no sacrifices made in the synagogues. When the second temple was destroyed in <span>AD<\/span> 70, synagogues became the only places where Jews could worship in public. Then there were no more sacrifices at all. The NT pictures this as fitting, for Jesus was the true Lamb of God (Jn 1:29); because of his death, there is no need for further animal sacrifice (Heb 10:11-12).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WorshipintheNewTestament\">Worship in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The Jews had become far too dependent on a physical place, the temple, for their worship. When Jesus arrived on the scene, he proclaimed that he himself was the temple of God; in resurrection, he would provide the spiritual dwelling where God the Spirit and people, in spirit, could have spiritual communion (see Mt 12:6; Jn 2:19-22). In other words, worship would no longer be in a place but in a person—through Jesus Christ and his Spirit the worshipers could come directly to God (see Jn 14:6; Heb 10:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>This shift in worship—from physical to spiritual—is the theme of John 4, a chapter that recounts Jesus’ visit to the Samaritans. After Jesus’ encounter with the Samaritan woman, she acknowledged that he must be a prophet, and then she launched into a discussion concerning the religious debate between the Jews and the Samaritans over which place of worship was the right one—Jerusalem or Mt Gerizim. The Samaritans had set up a place for worship on Mt Gerizim in accordance with Deuteronomy 11:26-29 and 27:1-8, while the Jews had followed David and Solomon in making Jerusalem the center of Jewish worship. The Scriptures affirmed Jerusalem as the true center for worship (Dt 12:5; 2 Chr 6:6; 7:12; Ps 78:67-68). But Jesus told her that a new age had come in which the issue no longer concerned a physical site. God the Father would no longer be worshiped in either place. A new age had come in which the true worshipers (Jew, Samaritan, or Gentile) must worship the Father in spirit and in truth.<\/p>\n<p>“In spirit” corresponds to Jerusalem, and “in truth” corresponds to the Samaritans’ unknowledgeable ideas of worship, God, etc. Formerly, God was worshiped in Jerusalem, but now the true Jerusalem would be in a person’s spirit. Indeed, the church is called “the habitation of God in spirit” (Eph 2:22). True worship required a people to contact God, the Spirit, in their spirit, as well as a people who knew the truth. New Testament worship must be in spirit and in truth. Since “God is Spirit,” he must be worshiped in spirit. Human beings possess a human spirit, the nature of which corresponds to God’s nature, which is spirit. Therefore, people can have fellowship with God and worship God in the same sphere that God exists in.<\/p>\n<p>In a sense, John 4 anticipates Revelation 21 and 22, where God provides the rivers of the water of life to all the believers and where the Lamb and God are the temple in the New Jerusalem. The believers receive life from God and they worship in God. There is a profound, even mystical connection between drinking of the Spirit and worshiping God in the Spirit (see 1 Cor 12:13). This is also described in Ezekiel 47, which pictures the river flowing from God’s temple as a symbol of God’s never-ending supply. In John 4, Jesus provides the living waters to all who receive the gift of God, and he directs people to a new temple, a spiritual one, where God is worshiped in spirit.<\/p>","summary_ro":"WORSHIP Expression of reverence and adoration of God. Worship in the Old Testament The 1,500 years from the days of Abraham to the time of Ezra (c. 1900–450 BC) saw many significant changes in the form of worship in ancient Israel. Abraham, the wandering nomad, built altars and offered sacrifices wherever God appeared to him. In Moses’ time the tabernacle served as a portable sanctuary for the Israelite tribes journeying through the wilderness. Solomon built a temple in Jerusalem that lasted ...","summary_en":"WORSHIP Expression of reverence and adoration of God. Worship in the Old Testament The 1,500 years from the days of Abraham to the time of Ezra (c. 1900–450 BC) saw many significant changes in the form of worship in ancient Israel. Abraham, the wandering nomad, built altars and offered sacrifices wherever God appeared to him. In Moses’ time the tabernacle served as a portable sanctuary for the Israelite tribes journeying through the wilderness. Solomon built a temple in Jerusalem that lasted ...","source":"Articles\/W.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":40108,"type":"textbox","type_label":"Notă explicativă","type_icon":"💡","type_color":"#8b5cf6","title_ro":"Leviticus and the Christian","title_en":"Leviticus and the Christian","content_ro":"<h3>Leviticus and the Christian<\/h3>\n<blockquote><p>The laws in Leviticus were given many years before Christ and seem very remote from Christian living at the onset of the 21st century. However, though our circumstances are very different, the basic religious message of Leviticus still is vital and valid today. It is in terms of the sacrifices mentioned in Leviticus that the NT understands the death of Christ. Jesus was the true burnt offering, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world (Jn 1:29). Jesus was the perfect sin offering whose blood cleanses us from all sin (1 Jn 1:7). His death has, of course, made animal sacrifices obsolete, but these old Levitical sacrifices show us what Jesus achieved for us.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>In other ways the theology of Leviticus still applies to the Christian. Christians are still called to be holy because God is holy (1 Pt 1:16). As those who ate sacrifices while they were unclean were warned in Leviticus that they would be cut off, so Paul warned the Corinthians that those who partook of the Lord’s Supper unworthily would face judgment (1 Cor 11:27-32). Leviticus insists that the priests must be examples of perfect holiness in their behavior; so Christian ministers are expected to be models of Christian virtue (1 Tm 3:1-13).<\/p>\n<p>The practical exhortations to care for the poor, the blind, and the deaf; to be fair and honest; and to be faithful in marriage are just as applicable now as they were 3,000 years ago. Our Lord summed up the whole Law and the Prophets with a quotation from Deuteronomy 6:5, “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart,” and another from Leviticus 19:18, “Love your neighbor as yourself” (<span>nlt<\/span>; cf. Mt 22:37-40). By studying and meditating on Leviticus, the modern Christian can learn much about the character of God and his will for holy living.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Leviticus and the Christian<\/h3>\n<blockquote><p>The laws in Leviticus were given many years before Christ and seem very remote from Christian living at the onset of the 21st century. However, though our circumstances are very different, the basic religious message of Leviticus still is vital and valid today. It is in terms of the sacrifices mentioned in Leviticus that the NT understands the death of Christ. Jesus was the true burnt offering, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world (Jn 1:29). Jesus was the perfect sin offering whose blood cleanses us from all sin (1 Jn 1:7). His death has, of course, made animal sacrifices obsolete, but these old Levitical sacrifices show us what Jesus achieved for us.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>In other ways the theology of Leviticus still applies to the Christian. Christians are still called to be holy because God is holy (1 Pt 1:16). As those who ate sacrifices while they were unclean were warned in Leviticus that they would be cut off, so Paul warned the Corinthians that those who partook of the Lord’s Supper unworthily would face judgment (1 Cor 11:27-32). Leviticus insists that the priests must be examples of perfect holiness in their behavior; so Christian ministers are expected to be models of Christian virtue (1 Tm 3:1-13).<\/p>\n<p>The practical exhortations to care for the poor, the blind, and the deaf; to be fair and honest; and to be faithful in marriage are just as applicable now as they were 3,000 years ago. Our Lord summed up the whole Law and the Prophets with a quotation from Deuteronomy 6:5, “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart,” and another from Leviticus 19:18, “Love your neighbor as yourself” (<span>nlt<\/span>; cf. Mt 22:37-40). By studying and meditating on Leviticus, the modern Christian can learn much about the character of God and his will for holy living.<\/p>","summary_ro":"Leviticus and the Christian The laws in Leviticus were given many years before Christ and seem very remote from Christian living at the onset of the 21st century. However, though our circumstances are very different, the basic religious message of Leviticus still is vital and valid today. It is in terms of the sacrifices mentioned in Leviticus that the NT understands the death of Christ. Jesus was the true burnt offering, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world (Jn 1:29). Jesus w...","summary_en":"Leviticus and the Christian The laws in Leviticus were given many years before Christ and seem very remote from Christian living at the onset of the 21st century. However, though our circumstances are very different, the basic religious message of Leviticus still is vital and valid today. It is in terms of the sacrifices mentioned in Leviticus that the NT understands the death of Christ. Jesus was the true burnt offering, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world (Jn 1:29). Jesus w...","source":"Textboxes\/Textboxes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":40340,"type":"textbox","type_label":"Notă explicativă","type_icon":"💡","type_color":"#8b5cf6","title_ro":"The Significance of Atonement in the New Testament","title_en":"The Significance of Atonement in the New Testament","content_ro":"<h3>The Significance of Atonement in the New Testament<\/h3>\n<blockquote><p>Many terms are employed to express the atoning significance of Christ’s death. His death is the “sacrifice to God” (Eph 5:2) and a “single sacrifice for sins” (Heb 10:12; cf. 9:26; 7:27). Paul wrote that God set Christ forth to be a “propitiation” (<span>kjv<\/span>) or “expiation” (<span>rsv<\/span>). The <span>niv<\/span> helps to clarify the concept by using the term “atoning sacrifice,” an expression that includes the ideas of both propitiation and expiation. The death of Christ is seen as the fulfillment of all that was prefigured by the OT sacrificial system.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>The sacrificial nature of Christ’s death is clearly expressed. He was referred to by Paul as “our paschal lamb” (1 Cor 5:7). The apostle Peter stated that believers are rescued “not with perishable things such as silver or gold, but with the precious blood of Christ, like that of a lamb without blemish or spot” (1 Pt 1:18-19). So also the references in John 1:29, 36 to Jesus as the “Lamb of God” probably had in mind the idea of sacrifice.<\/p>\n<p>If Christ is viewed as our sacrifice, he is also viewed as our representative. That is, he represented us in his death. One of the most difficult phrases to interpret precisely is the common biblical expression “for us” (“for me,” etc.). It may mean generally “for my sake” or something more specific. Does Christ represent us? More specifically, is he a substitute for us? Some texts clearly speak of him as our representative. Thus Paul said, “We are convinced that one has died for all; therefore all have died” (2 Cor 5:14). If “substitution” were meant, the last clause would conclude that we will not, or do not, die. Hebrews speaks of Christ as our High Priest before the Father, which is probably what John had in mind when he referred to Christ as our “advocate with the Father” (1 Jn 2:2).<\/p>\n<p>The expression “for us” at times seems to mean much more than representation; it often carries the sense of substitution, an idea prevalent in the OT. So, “For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God” (2 Cor 5:21). Two “ransom sayings” also portray substitution: “The Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many” (Mk 10:45, <span>kjv<\/span>). He “gave himself as a ransom for all” (1 Tm 2:6). He became a “curse for us” (Gal 3:13). The unintended prophecy of Caiaphas the high priest pointed to the same reality: “It is expedient for you that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation should not perish” (Jn 11:50).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Significance of Atonement in the New Testament<\/h3>\n<blockquote><p>Many terms are employed to express the atoning significance of Christ’s death. His death is the “sacrifice to God” (Eph 5:2) and a “single sacrifice for sins” (Heb 10:12; cf. 9:26; 7:27). Paul wrote that God set Christ forth to be a “propitiation” (<span>kjv<\/span>) or “expiation” (<span>rsv<\/span>). The <span>niv<\/span> helps to clarify the concept by using the term “atoning sacrifice,” an expression that includes the ideas of both propitiation and expiation. The death of Christ is seen as the fulfillment of all that was prefigured by the OT sacrificial system.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>The sacrificial nature of Christ’s death is clearly expressed. He was referred to by Paul as “our paschal lamb” (1 Cor 5:7). The apostle Peter stated that believers are rescued “not with perishable things such as silver or gold, but with the precious blood of Christ, like that of a lamb without blemish or spot” (1 Pt 1:18-19). So also the references in John 1:29, 36 to Jesus as the “Lamb of God” probably had in mind the idea of sacrifice.<\/p>\n<p>If Christ is viewed as our sacrifice, he is also viewed as our representative. That is, he represented us in his death. One of the most difficult phrases to interpret precisely is the common biblical expression “for us” (“for me,” etc.). It may mean generally “for my sake” or something more specific. Does Christ represent us? More specifically, is he a substitute for us? Some texts clearly speak of him as our representative. Thus Paul said, “We are convinced that one has died for all; therefore all have died” (2 Cor 5:14). If “substitution” were meant, the last clause would conclude that we will not, or do not, die. Hebrews speaks of Christ as our High Priest before the Father, which is probably what John had in mind when he referred to Christ as our “advocate with the Father” (1 Jn 2:2).<\/p>\n<p>The expression “for us” at times seems to mean much more than representation; it often carries the sense of substitution, an idea prevalent in the OT. So, “For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God” (2 Cor 5:21). Two “ransom sayings” also portray substitution: “The Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many” (Mk 10:45, <span>kjv<\/span>). He “gave himself as a ransom for all” (1 Tm 2:6). He became a “curse for us” (Gal 3:13). The unintended prophecy of Caiaphas the high priest pointed to the same reality: “It is expedient for you that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation should not perish” (Jn 11:50).<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Significance of Atonement in the New Testament Many terms are employed to express the atoning significance of Christ’s death. His death is the “sacrifice to God” (Eph 5:2) and a “single sacrifice for sins” (Heb 10:12; cf. 9:26; 7:27). Paul wrote that God set Christ forth to be a “propitiation” (kjv) or “expiation” (rsv). The niv helps to clarify the concept by using the term “atoning sacrifice,” an expression that includes the ideas of both propitiation and expiation. The death of Christ ...","summary_en":"The Significance of Atonement in the New Testament Many terms are employed to express the atoning significance of Christ’s death. His death is the “sacrifice to God” (Eph 5:2) and a “single sacrifice for sins” (Heb 10:12; cf. 9:26; 7:27). Paul wrote that God set Christ forth to be a “propitiation” (kjv) or “expiation” (rsv). The niv helps to clarify the concept by using the term “atoning sacrifice,” an expression that includes the ideas of both propitiation and expiation. The death of Christ ...","source":"Textboxes\/Textboxes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":39718,"type":"chart","type_label":"Diagramă","type_icon":"📊","type_color":"#3b82f6","title_ro":"Messianic Prophecies and Fulfillments","title_en":"Messianic Prophecies and Fulfillments","content_ro":"<h3>Messianic Prophecies and Fulfillments<\/h3>\n<p>For the Gospel writers, one of the main reasons for believing in Jesus was the way his life fulfilled the Old Testament prophecies about the Messiah. Following is a list of some of the main prophecies.<\/p>\n<table>\n <tr>\n <td><p class=\"td\"\/><\/td>\n <td><p><strong>Old Testament Prophecies<\/strong><\/p><\/td>\n <td><p><strong>New Testament Fulfillment<\/strong><\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 1. Messiah was to be born in Bethlehem<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Micah 5:2<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 2:1-6<\/p><p>Luke 2:1-20<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 2. Messiah was to be born of a virgin<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 7:14<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 1:18-25<\/p><p>Luke 1:26-38<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 3. Messiah was to be a prophet like Moses<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Deuteronomy 18:15, 18-19<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>John 7:40<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 4. Messiah was to enter Jerusalem in triumph<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Zechariah 9:9<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 21:1-9<\/p><p>John 12:12-16<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 5. Messiah was to be rejected by his own people<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:1, 3<\/p><p>Psalm 118:22<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 26:3-4<\/p><p>John 12:37-43<\/p><p>Acts 4:1-12<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 6. Messiah was to be betrayed by one of his followers<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 41:9<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 26:14-16, 47-50<\/p><p>Luke 22:19-23<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 7. Messiah was to be tried and condemned<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:8<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Luke 23:1-25<\/p><p>Matthew 27:1-2<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 8. Messiah was to be silent before his accusers<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:7<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:12-14<\/p><p>Mark 15:3-4<\/p><p>Luke 23:8-10<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 9. Messiah was to be struck and spat on by his enemies<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 50:6<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 26:67; 27:30<\/p><p>Mark 14:65<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>10. Messiah was to be mocked and insulted<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 22:7-8<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:39-44<\/p><p>Luke 23:11, 35<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>11. Messiah was to die by crucifixion<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 22:14, 16-17<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:31<\/p><p>Mark 15:20, 25<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>12. Messiah was to suffer with criminals and pray for his enemies<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:12<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:38<\/p><p>Mark 15:27, 28<\/p><p>Luke 23:32-34<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>13. Messiah was to be given vinegar<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 69:21<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:34<\/p><p>John 19:28-30<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>14. Others were to cast lots for Messiah’s garments<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 22:18<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:35<\/p><p>John 19:23-24<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>15. Messiah’s bones were not to be broken<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Exodus 12:46<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>John 19:31-36<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>16. Messiah was to die as a sacrifice for sin<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:5-6, 8, 10-12<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>John 1:29; 11:49-52<\/p><p>Acts 10:43; 13:38, 39<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>17. Messiah was to be raised from the dead<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 16:10<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 28:1-10<\/p><p>Acts 2:22-32<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>18. Messiah is now at God’s right hand<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 110:1<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Mark 16:19<\/p><p>Luke 24:50-51<\/p><\/td><\/tr><\/table>","content_en":"<h3>Messianic Prophecies and Fulfillments<\/h3>\n<p>For the Gospel writers, one of the main reasons for believing in Jesus was the way his life fulfilled the Old Testament prophecies about the Messiah. Following is a list of some of the main prophecies.<\/p>\n<table>\n <tr>\n <td><p class=\"td\"\/><\/td>\n <td><p><strong>Old Testament Prophecies<\/strong><\/p><\/td>\n <td><p><strong>New Testament Fulfillment<\/strong><\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 1. Messiah was to be born in Bethlehem<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Micah 5:2<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 2:1-6<\/p><p>Luke 2:1-20<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 2. Messiah was to be born of a virgin<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 7:14<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 1:18-25<\/p><p>Luke 1:26-38<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 3. Messiah was to be a prophet like Moses<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Deuteronomy 18:15, 18-19<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>John 7:40<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 4. Messiah was to enter Jerusalem in triumph<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Zechariah 9:9<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 21:1-9<\/p><p>John 12:12-16<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 5. Messiah was to be rejected by his own people<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:1, 3<\/p><p>Psalm 118:22<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 26:3-4<\/p><p>John 12:37-43<\/p><p>Acts 4:1-12<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 6. Messiah was to be betrayed by one of his followers<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 41:9<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 26:14-16, 47-50<\/p><p>Luke 22:19-23<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 7. Messiah was to be tried and condemned<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:8<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Luke 23:1-25<\/p><p>Matthew 27:1-2<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 8. Messiah was to be silent before his accusers<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:7<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:12-14<\/p><p>Mark 15:3-4<\/p><p>Luke 23:8-10<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 9. Messiah was to be struck and spat on by his enemies<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 50:6<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 26:67; 27:30<\/p><p>Mark 14:65<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>10. Messiah was to be mocked and insulted<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 22:7-8<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:39-44<\/p><p>Luke 23:11, 35<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>11. Messiah was to die by crucifixion<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 22:14, 16-17<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:31<\/p><p>Mark 15:20, 25<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>12. Messiah was to suffer with criminals and pray for his enemies<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:12<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:38<\/p><p>Mark 15:27, 28<\/p><p>Luke 23:32-34<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>13. Messiah was to be given vinegar<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 69:21<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:34<\/p><p>John 19:28-30<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>14. Others were to cast lots for Messiah’s garments<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 22:18<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:35<\/p><p>John 19:23-24<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>15. Messiah’s bones were not to be broken<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Exodus 12:46<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>John 19:31-36<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>16. Messiah was to die as a sacrifice for sin<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:5-6, 8, 10-12<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>John 1:29; 11:49-52<\/p><p>Acts 10:43; 13:38, 39<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>17. Messiah was to be raised from the dead<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 16:10<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 28:1-10<\/p><p>Acts 2:22-32<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>18. Messiah is now at God’s right hand<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 110:1<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Mark 16:19<\/p><p>Luke 24:50-51<\/p><\/td><\/tr><\/table>","summary_ro":"Messianic Prophecies and Fulfillments For the Gospel writers, one of the main reasons for believing in Jesus was the way his life fulfilled the Old Testament prophecies about the Messiah. Following is a list of some of the main prophecies. Old Testament Prophecies New Testament Fulfillment 1. Messiah was to be born in Bethlehem Micah 5:2 Matthew 2:1-6Luke 2:1-20 2. Messiah was to be born of a virgin Isaiah 7:14 Matthew 1:18-25Luke 1:26-38 3. Messiah was to be a prophet like Moses Deuterono...","summary_en":"Messianic Prophecies and Fulfillments For the Gospel writers, one of the main reasons for believing in Jesus was the way his life fulfilled the Old Testament prophecies about the Messiah. Following is a list of some of the main prophecies. Old Testament Prophecies New Testament Fulfillment 1. Messiah was to be born in Bethlehem Micah 5:2 Matthew 2:1-6Luke 2:1-20 2. Messiah was to be born of a virgin Isaiah 7:14 Matthew 1:18-25Luke 1:26-38 3. Messiah was to be a prophet like Moses Deuterono...","source":"Charts\/Charts.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56328,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:29","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:29","content_ro":"<p><strong>1:29<\/strong> The phrase <em>Lamb of God<\/em> might refer to the Passover sacrifice of a lamb or to the daily sacrifice in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46; Heb 10). See also Rev 5.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>1:29<\/strong> The phrase <em>Lamb of God<\/em> might refer to the Passover sacrifice of a lamb or to the daily sacrifice in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46; Heb 10). See also Rev 5.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:29 The phrase Lamb of God might refer to the Passover sacrifice of a lamb or to the daily sacrifice in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46; Heb 10). See also Rev 5.","summary_en":"1:29 The phrase Lamb of God might refer to the Passover sacrifice of a lamb or to the daily sacrifice in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46; Heb 10). See also Rev 5.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83954,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:29","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:29","content_ro":"<p><strong>1:29<\/strong> The phrase <em>Lamb of God<\/em> might refer to the Passover sacrifice of a lamb or to the daily sacrifice in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46; Heb 10). See also Rev 5.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>1:29<\/strong> The phrase <em>Lamb of God<\/em> might refer to the Passover sacrifice of a lamb or to the daily sacrifice in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46; Heb 10). See also Rev 5.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:29 The phrase Lamb of God might refer to the Passover sacrifice of a lamb or to the daily sacrifice in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46; Heb 10). See also Rev 5.","summary_en":"1:29 The phrase Lamb of God might refer to the Passover sacrifice of a lamb or to the daily sacrifice in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46; Heb 10). See also Rev 5.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111580,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:29","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:29","content_ro":"<p><strong>1:29<\/strong> The phrase <em>Lamb of God<\/em> might refer to the Passover sacrifice of a lamb or to the daily sacrifice in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46; Heb 10). See also Rev 5.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>1:29<\/strong> The phrase <em>Lamb of God<\/em> might refer to the Passover sacrifice of a lamb or to the daily sacrifice in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46; Heb 10). See also Rev 5.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:29 The phrase Lamb of God might refer to the Passover sacrifice of a lamb or to the daily sacrifice in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46; Heb 10). See also Rev 5.","summary_en":"1:29 The phrase Lamb of God might refer to the Passover sacrifice of a lamb or to the daily sacrifice in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46; Heb 10). See also Rev 5.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139206,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:29","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:29","content_ro":"<p><strong>1:29<\/strong> The phrase <em>Lamb of God<\/em> might refer to the Passover sacrifice of a lamb or to the daily sacrifice in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46; Heb 10). See also Rev 5.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>1:29<\/strong> The phrase <em>Lamb of God<\/em> might refer to the Passover sacrifice of a lamb or to the daily sacrifice in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46; Heb 10). See also Rev 5.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:29 The phrase Lamb of God might refer to the Passover sacrifice of a lamb or to the daily sacrifice in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46; Heb 10). See also Rev 5.","summary_en":"1:29 The phrase Lamb of God might refer to the Passover sacrifice of a lamb or to the daily sacrifice in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46; Heb 10). See also Rev 5.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60329,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Passover","title_en":"The Passover","content_ro":"<h3>The Passover<\/h3>\n<p>The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate only unleavened bread, just as they had done in their hurried departure from Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>In that first Passover, a lamb was sacrificed that took the place of the firstborn son of every family of Israel (Exod 12:12-13, 23). Passover thus carries the notion that we can be delivered from death only by means of a sacrifice that takes our place. But while Passover marked an event of tremendous significance in Israelite history, the events of the Exodus did not conquer the universal, fundamental problem of death, a problem that stems from sin (1 Cor 15:56).<\/p>\n<p>Many years later, around the time of the Passover festival, Jesus Christ gave his life as “a ransom for many” (Matt 20:28; Mark 10:45) and became “the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). While sharing a final Passover meal with his disciples, Jesus spoke of the symbolic nature of the wine they shared: “This is my blood, which confirms the covenant. . . . It is poured out as a sacrifice to forgive the sins of many” (Matt 26:28). He embodies and enacts a new Passover: Through his sacrifice, sin and death were fully and finally defeated (see also Isa 25:7-8).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1-51; Lev 23:4-8; Num 9:1-14; 28:16-25; Deut 16:1-7; Matt 26:17-30; Luke 22:15-20; 1 Cor 5:6-8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Passover<\/h3>\n<p>The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate only unleavened bread, just as they had done in their hurried departure from Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>In that first Passover, a lamb was sacrificed that took the place of the firstborn son of every family of Israel (Exod 12:12-13, 23). Passover thus carries the notion that we can be delivered from death only by means of a sacrifice that takes our place. But while Passover marked an event of tremendous significance in Israelite history, the events of the Exodus did not conquer the universal, fundamental problem of death, a problem that stems from sin (1 Cor 15:56).<\/p>\n<p>Many years later, around the time of the Passover festival, Jesus Christ gave his life as “a ransom for many” (Matt 20:28; Mark 10:45) and became “the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). While sharing a final Passover meal with his disciples, Jesus spoke of the symbolic nature of the wine they shared: “This is my blood, which confirms the covenant. . . . It is poured out as a sacrifice to forgive the sins of many” (Matt 26:28). He embodies and enacts a new Passover: Through his sacrifice, sin and death were fully and finally defeated (see also Isa 25:7-8).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1-51; Lev 23:4-8; Num 9:1-14; 28:16-25; Deut 16:1-7; Matt 26:17-30; Luke 22:15-20; 1 Cor 5:6-8<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Passover The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate...","summary_en":"The Passover The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60462,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Atonement","title_en":"Atonement","content_ro":"<h3>Atonement<\/h3>\n<p>Leviticus 16 describes the Day of Atonement. On this day, the high priest presented the sins of the community to the Lord. Worshiping a holy God requires atonement, the removal of any uncleanness or sin that stands in the way. God’s grace permitted the death of an animal to be accepted in exchange for the sinner’s life. In the atoning offerings, the sacrifice represented the life of the worshiper: The animal was sacrificed so that the worshiper might live. God designated the blood of the sacrifice—blood represents life—as the means of atonement (Lev 17:11).<\/p>\n<p>Atonement provides both <em>expiation<\/em> and <em>propitiation.<\/em> Expiation is the payment of what is owed. For example, the guilt offering (5:14–6:7) involves damages or loss to property, and the loss must be repaid with a 20 percent surcharge. Propitiation, on the other hand, involves appeasing or pacifying an offended party. For example, the whole burnt offering (1:1-17) and the sin offering (4:1–5:13) require no discernable payment of a debt.<\/p>\n<p>In the atoning sacrifices, the act of laying hands on the victim (4:4-35; 16:21) indicates identification of the worshiper with the animal being sacrificed. The blood, representing the life of the animal (17:14), is presented in place of the life of the worshiper (17:11). The animal is killed, and its blood and certain parts are ceremonially presented to God, thus cleansing the worshiper and averting God’s wrath.<\/p>\n<p>The blood of Jesus brings atonement (Eph 1:7; Col 1:20) and obtains eternal redemption for believers (Heb 9:12). Christ, God’s lamb, reconciles us to God (John 1:29; Heb 9:14). He paid our debt of sin (expiation) and satisfied God’s judgment against us (propitiation).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:17-22; 30:10-16; Lev 1:1-17; 4:1–6:7; 16:1-34; 17:10-14; 23:26-32; Num 15:22-29; 29:7-11; Ps 51:7; Prov 16:6; Ezek 43:18-27; Dan 9:24; John 1:29; Eph 1:7; Col 1:20; Heb 2:16-17; 9:12-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Atonement<\/h3>\n<p>Leviticus 16 describes the Day of Atonement. On this day, the high priest presented the sins of the community to the Lord. Worshiping a holy God requires atonement, the removal of any uncleanness or sin that stands in the way. God’s grace permitted the death of an animal to be accepted in exchange for the sinner’s life. In the atoning offerings, the sacrifice represented the life of the worshiper: The animal was sacrificed so that the worshiper might live. God designated the blood of the sacrifice—blood represents life—as the means of atonement (Lev 17:11).<\/p>\n<p>Atonement provides both <em>expiation<\/em> and <em>propitiation.<\/em> Expiation is the payment of what is owed. For example, the guilt offering (5:14–6:7) involves damages or loss to property, and the loss must be repaid with a 20 percent surcharge. Propitiation, on the other hand, involves appeasing or pacifying an offended party. For example, the whole burnt offering (1:1-17) and the sin offering (4:1–5:13) require no discernable payment of a debt.<\/p>\n<p>In the atoning sacrifices, the act of laying hands on the victim (4:4-35; 16:21) indicates identification of the worshiper with the animal being sacrificed. The blood, representing the life of the animal (17:14), is presented in place of the life of the worshiper (17:11). The animal is killed, and its blood and certain parts are ceremonially presented to God, thus cleansing the worshiper and averting God’s wrath.<\/p>\n<p>The blood of Jesus brings atonement (Eph 1:7; Col 1:20) and obtains eternal redemption for believers (Heb 9:12). Christ, God’s lamb, reconciles us to God (John 1:29; Heb 9:14). He paid our debt of sin (expiation) and satisfied God’s judgment against us (propitiation).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:17-22; 30:10-16; Lev 1:1-17; 4:1–6:7; 16:1-34; 17:10-14; 23:26-32; Num 15:22-29; 29:7-11; Ps 51:7; Prov 16:6; Ezek 43:18-27; Dan 9:24; John 1:29; Eph 1:7; Col 1:20; Heb 2:16-17; 9:12-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"Atonement Leviticus 16 describes the Day of Atonement. On this day, the high priest presented the sins of the community to the Lord. Worshiping a holy God requires atonement, the removal of any uncleanness or sin that stands in the way. God’s grace permitted the death of an animal to be accepted in exchange for the sinner’s life. In the atoning offerings, the sacrifice represented the life of the worshiper: The animal was sacrificed so that the worshiper might live. God designated the blood o...","summary_en":"Atonement Leviticus 16 describes the Day of Atonement. On this day, the high priest presented the sins of the community to the Lord. Worshiping a holy God requires atonement, the removal of any uncleanness or sin that stands in the way. God’s grace permitted the death of an animal to be accepted in exchange for the sinner’s life. In the atoning offerings, the sacrifice represented the life of the worshiper: The animal was sacrificed so that the worshiper might live. God designated the blood o...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65530,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Encounters with Jesus","title_en":"Encounters with Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","summary_ro":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","summary_en":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66050,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The World","title_en":"The World","content_ro":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","summary_en":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66082,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Cross and Passover","title_en":"The Cross and Passover","content_ro":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","summary_en":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":87955,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Passover","title_en":"The Passover","content_ro":"<h3>The Passover<\/h3>\n<p>The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate only unleavened bread, just as they had done in their hurried departure from Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>In that first Passover, a lamb was sacrificed that took the place of the firstborn son of every family of Israel (Exod 12:12-13, 23). Passover thus carries the notion that we can be delivered from death only by means of a sacrifice that takes our place. But while Passover marked an event of tremendous significance in Israelite history, the events of the Exodus did not conquer the universal, fundamental problem of death, a problem that stems from sin (1 Cor 15:56).<\/p>\n<p>Many years later, around the time of the Passover festival, Jesus Christ gave his life as “a ransom for many” (Matt 20:28; Mark 10:45) and became “the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). While sharing a final Passover meal with his disciples, Jesus spoke of the symbolic nature of the wine they shared: “This is my blood, which confirms the covenant. . . . It is poured out as a sacrifice to forgive the sins of many” (Matt 26:28). He embodies and enacts a new Passover: Through his sacrifice, sin and death were fully and finally defeated (see also Isa 25:7-8).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1-51; Lev 23:4-8; Num 9:1-14; 28:16-25; Deut 16:1-7; Matt 26:17-30; Luke 22:15-20; 1 Cor 5:6-8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Passover<\/h3>\n<p>The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate only unleavened bread, just as they had done in their hurried departure from Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>In that first Passover, a lamb was sacrificed that took the place of the firstborn son of every family of Israel (Exod 12:12-13, 23). Passover thus carries the notion that we can be delivered from death only by means of a sacrifice that takes our place. But while Passover marked an event of tremendous significance in Israelite history, the events of the Exodus did not conquer the universal, fundamental problem of death, a problem that stems from sin (1 Cor 15:56).<\/p>\n<p>Many years later, around the time of the Passover festival, Jesus Christ gave his life as “a ransom for many” (Matt 20:28; Mark 10:45) and became “the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). While sharing a final Passover meal with his disciples, Jesus spoke of the symbolic nature of the wine they shared: “This is my blood, which confirms the covenant. . . . It is poured out as a sacrifice to forgive the sins of many” (Matt 26:28). He embodies and enacts a new Passover: Through his sacrifice, sin and death were fully and finally defeated (see also Isa 25:7-8).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1-51; Lev 23:4-8; Num 9:1-14; 28:16-25; Deut 16:1-7; Matt 26:17-30; Luke 22:15-20; 1 Cor 5:6-8<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Passover The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate...","summary_en":"The Passover The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88088,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Atonement","title_en":"Atonement","content_ro":"<h3>Atonement<\/h3>\n<p>Leviticus 16 describes the Day of Atonement. On this day, the high priest presented the sins of the community to the Lord. Worshiping a holy God requires atonement, the removal of any uncleanness or sin that stands in the way. God’s grace permitted the death of an animal to be accepted in exchange for the sinner’s life. In the atoning offerings, the sacrifice represented the life of the worshiper: The animal was sacrificed so that the worshiper might live. God designated the blood of the sacrifice—blood represents life—as the means of atonement (Lev 17:11).<\/p>\n<p>Atonement provides both <em>expiation<\/em> and <em>propitiation.<\/em> Expiation is the payment of what is owed. For example, the guilt offering (5:14–6:7) involves damages or loss to property, and the loss must be repaid with a 20 percent surcharge. Propitiation, on the other hand, involves appeasing or pacifying an offended party. For example, the whole burnt offering (1:1-17) and the sin offering (4:1–5:13) require no discernable payment of a debt.<\/p>\n<p>In the atoning sacrifices, the act of laying hands on the victim (4:4-35; 16:21) indicates identification of the worshiper with the animal being sacrificed. The blood, representing the life of the animal (17:14), is presented in place of the life of the worshiper (17:11). The animal is killed, and its blood and certain parts are ceremonially presented to God, thus cleansing the worshiper and averting God’s wrath.<\/p>\n<p>The blood of Jesus brings atonement (Eph 1:7; Col 1:20) and obtains eternal redemption for believers (Heb 9:12). Christ, God’s lamb, reconciles us to God (John 1:29; Heb 9:14). He paid our debt of sin (expiation) and satisfied God’s judgment against us (propitiation).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:17-22; 30:10-16; Lev 1:1-17; 4:1–6:7; 16:1-34; 17:10-14; 23:26-32; Num 15:22-29; 29:7-11; Ps 51:7; Prov 16:6; Ezek 43:18-27; Dan 9:24; John 1:29; Eph 1:7; Col 1:20; Heb 2:16-17; 9:12-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Atonement<\/h3>\n<p>Leviticus 16 describes the Day of Atonement. On this day, the high priest presented the sins of the community to the Lord. Worshiping a holy God requires atonement, the removal of any uncleanness or sin that stands in the way. God’s grace permitted the death of an animal to be accepted in exchange for the sinner’s life. In the atoning offerings, the sacrifice represented the life of the worshiper: The animal was sacrificed so that the worshiper might live. God designated the blood of the sacrifice—blood represents life—as the means of atonement (Lev 17:11).<\/p>\n<p>Atonement provides both <em>expiation<\/em> and <em>propitiation.<\/em> Expiation is the payment of what is owed. For example, the guilt offering (5:14–6:7) involves damages or loss to property, and the loss must be repaid with a 20 percent surcharge. Propitiation, on the other hand, involves appeasing or pacifying an offended party. For example, the whole burnt offering (1:1-17) and the sin offering (4:1–5:13) require no discernable payment of a debt.<\/p>\n<p>In the atoning sacrifices, the act of laying hands on the victim (4:4-35; 16:21) indicates identification of the worshiper with the animal being sacrificed. The blood, representing the life of the animal (17:14), is presented in place of the life of the worshiper (17:11). The animal is killed, and its blood and certain parts are ceremonially presented to God, thus cleansing the worshiper and averting God’s wrath.<\/p>\n<p>The blood of Jesus brings atonement (Eph 1:7; Col 1:20) and obtains eternal redemption for believers (Heb 9:12). Christ, God’s lamb, reconciles us to God (John 1:29; Heb 9:14). He paid our debt of sin (expiation) and satisfied God’s judgment against us (propitiation).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:17-22; 30:10-16; Lev 1:1-17; 4:1–6:7; 16:1-34; 17:10-14; 23:26-32; Num 15:22-29; 29:7-11; Ps 51:7; Prov 16:6; Ezek 43:18-27; Dan 9:24; John 1:29; Eph 1:7; Col 1:20; Heb 2:16-17; 9:12-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"Atonement Leviticus 16 describes the Day of Atonement. On this day, the high priest presented the sins of the community to the Lord. Worshiping a holy God requires atonement, the removal of any uncleanness or sin that stands in the way. God’s grace permitted the death of an animal to be accepted in exchange for the sinner’s life. In the atoning offerings, the sacrifice represented the life of the worshiper: The animal was sacrificed so that the worshiper might live. God designated the blood o...","summary_en":"Atonement Leviticus 16 describes the Day of Atonement. On this day, the high priest presented the sins of the community to the Lord. Worshiping a holy God requires atonement, the removal of any uncleanness or sin that stands in the way. God’s grace permitted the death of an animal to be accepted in exchange for the sinner’s life. In the atoning offerings, the sacrifice represented the life of the worshiper: The animal was sacrificed so that the worshiper might live. God designated the blood o...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93156,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Encounters with Jesus","title_en":"Encounters with Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","summary_ro":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","summary_en":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93676,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The World","title_en":"The World","content_ro":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","summary_en":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93708,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Cross and Passover","title_en":"The Cross and Passover","content_ro":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","summary_en":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115581,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Passover","title_en":"The Passover","content_ro":"<h3>The Passover<\/h3>\n<p>The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate only unleavened bread, just as they had done in their hurried departure from Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>In that first Passover, a lamb was sacrificed that took the place of the firstborn son of every family of Israel (Exod 12:12-13, 23). Passover thus carries the notion that we can be delivered from death only by means of a sacrifice that takes our place. But while Passover marked an event of tremendous significance in Israelite history, the events of the Exodus did not conquer the universal, fundamental problem of death, a problem that stems from sin (1 Cor 15:56).<\/p>\n<p>Many years later, around the time of the Passover festival, Jesus Christ gave his life as “a ransom for many” (Matt 20:28; Mark 10:45) and became “the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). While sharing a final Passover meal with his disciples, Jesus spoke of the symbolic nature of the wine they shared: “This is my blood, which confirms the covenant. . . . It is poured out as a sacrifice to forgive the sins of many” (Matt 26:28). He embodies and enacts a new Passover: Through his sacrifice, sin and death were fully and finally defeated (see also Isa 25:7-8).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1-51; Lev 23:4-8; Num 9:1-14; 28:16-25; Deut 16:1-7; Matt 26:17-30; Luke 22:15-20; 1 Cor 5:6-8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Passover<\/h3>\n<p>The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate only unleavened bread, just as they had done in their hurried departure from Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>In that first Passover, a lamb was sacrificed that took the place of the firstborn son of every family of Israel (Exod 12:12-13, 23). Passover thus carries the notion that we can be delivered from death only by means of a sacrifice that takes our place. But while Passover marked an event of tremendous significance in Israelite history, the events of the Exodus did not conquer the universal, fundamental problem of death, a problem that stems from sin (1 Cor 15:56).<\/p>\n<p>Many years later, around the time of the Passover festival, Jesus Christ gave his life as “a ransom for many” (Matt 20:28; Mark 10:45) and became “the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). While sharing a final Passover meal with his disciples, Jesus spoke of the symbolic nature of the wine they shared: “This is my blood, which confirms the covenant. . . . It is poured out as a sacrifice to forgive the sins of many” (Matt 26:28). He embodies and enacts a new Passover: Through his sacrifice, sin and death were fully and finally defeated (see also Isa 25:7-8).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1-51; Lev 23:4-8; Num 9:1-14; 28:16-25; Deut 16:1-7; Matt 26:17-30; Luke 22:15-20; 1 Cor 5:6-8<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Passover The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate...","summary_en":"The Passover The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115714,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Atonement","title_en":"Atonement","content_ro":"<h3>Atonement<\/h3>\n<p>Leviticus 16 describes the Day of Atonement. On this day, the high priest presented the sins of the community to the Lord. Worshiping a holy God requires atonement, the removal of any uncleanness or sin that stands in the way. God’s grace permitted the death of an animal to be accepted in exchange for the sinner’s life. In the atoning offerings, the sacrifice represented the life of the worshiper: The animal was sacrificed so that the worshiper might live. God designated the blood of the sacrifice—blood represents life—as the means of atonement (Lev 17:11).<\/p>\n<p>Atonement provides both <em>expiation<\/em> and <em>propitiation.<\/em> Expiation is the payment of what is owed. For example, the guilt offering (5:14–6:7) involves damages or loss to property, and the loss must be repaid with a 20 percent surcharge. Propitiation, on the other hand, involves appeasing or pacifying an offended party. For example, the whole burnt offering (1:1-17) and the sin offering (4:1–5:13) require no discernable payment of a debt.<\/p>\n<p>In the atoning sacrifices, the act of laying hands on the victim (4:4-35; 16:21) indicates identification of the worshiper with the animal being sacrificed. The blood, representing the life of the animal (17:14), is presented in place of the life of the worshiper (17:11). The animal is killed, and its blood and certain parts are ceremonially presented to God, thus cleansing the worshiper and averting God’s wrath.<\/p>\n<p>The blood of Jesus brings atonement (Eph 1:7; Col 1:20) and obtains eternal redemption for believers (Heb 9:12). Christ, God’s lamb, reconciles us to God (John 1:29; Heb 9:14). He paid our debt of sin (expiation) and satisfied God’s judgment against us (propitiation).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:17-22; 30:10-16; Lev 1:1-17; 4:1–6:7; 16:1-34; 17:10-14; 23:26-32; Num 15:22-29; 29:7-11; Ps 51:7; Prov 16:6; Ezek 43:18-27; Dan 9:24; John 1:29; Eph 1:7; Col 1:20; Heb 2:16-17; 9:12-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Atonement<\/h3>\n<p>Leviticus 16 describes the Day of Atonement. On this day, the high priest presented the sins of the community to the Lord. Worshiping a holy God requires atonement, the removal of any uncleanness or sin that stands in the way. God’s grace permitted the death of an animal to be accepted in exchange for the sinner’s life. In the atoning offerings, the sacrifice represented the life of the worshiper: The animal was sacrificed so that the worshiper might live. God designated the blood of the sacrifice—blood represents life—as the means of atonement (Lev 17:11).<\/p>\n<p>Atonement provides both <em>expiation<\/em> and <em>propitiation.<\/em> Expiation is the payment of what is owed. For example, the guilt offering (5:14–6:7) involves damages or loss to property, and the loss must be repaid with a 20 percent surcharge. Propitiation, on the other hand, involves appeasing or pacifying an offended party. For example, the whole burnt offering (1:1-17) and the sin offering (4:1–5:13) require no discernable payment of a debt.<\/p>\n<p>In the atoning sacrifices, the act of laying hands on the victim (4:4-35; 16:21) indicates identification of the worshiper with the animal being sacrificed. The blood, representing the life of the animal (17:14), is presented in place of the life of the worshiper (17:11). The animal is killed, and its blood and certain parts are ceremonially presented to God, thus cleansing the worshiper and averting God’s wrath.<\/p>\n<p>The blood of Jesus brings atonement (Eph 1:7; Col 1:20) and obtains eternal redemption for believers (Heb 9:12). Christ, God’s lamb, reconciles us to God (John 1:29; Heb 9:14). He paid our debt of sin (expiation) and satisfied God’s judgment against us (propitiation).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:17-22; 30:10-16; Lev 1:1-17; 4:1–6:7; 16:1-34; 17:10-14; 23:26-32; Num 15:22-29; 29:7-11; Ps 51:7; Prov 16:6; Ezek 43:18-27; Dan 9:24; John 1:29; Eph 1:7; Col 1:20; Heb 2:16-17; 9:12-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"Atonement Leviticus 16 describes the Day of Atonement. On this day, the high priest presented the sins of the community to the Lord. Worshiping a holy God requires atonement, the removal of any uncleanness or sin that stands in the way. God’s grace permitted the death of an animal to be accepted in exchange for the sinner’s life. In the atoning offerings, the sacrifice represented the life of the worshiper: The animal was sacrificed so that the worshiper might live. God designated the blood o...","summary_en":"Atonement Leviticus 16 describes the Day of Atonement. On this day, the high priest presented the sins of the community to the Lord. Worshiping a holy God requires atonement, the removal of any uncleanness or sin that stands in the way. God’s grace permitted the death of an animal to be accepted in exchange for the sinner’s life. In the atoning offerings, the sacrifice represented the life of the worshiper: The animal was sacrificed so that the worshiper might live. God designated the blood o...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120782,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Encounters with Jesus","title_en":"Encounters with Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","summary_ro":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","summary_en":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121302,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The World","title_en":"The World","content_ro":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","summary_en":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121334,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Cross and Passover","title_en":"The Cross and Passover","content_ro":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","summary_en":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143207,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Passover","title_en":"The Passover","content_ro":"<h3>The Passover<\/h3>\n<p>The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate only unleavened bread, just as they had done in their hurried departure from Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>In that first Passover, a lamb was sacrificed that took the place of the firstborn son of every family of Israel (Exod 12:12-13, 23). Passover thus carries the notion that we can be delivered from death only by means of a sacrifice that takes our place. But while Passover marked an event of tremendous significance in Israelite history, the events of the Exodus did not conquer the universal, fundamental problem of death, a problem that stems from sin (1 Cor 15:56).<\/p>\n<p>Many years later, around the time of the Passover festival, Jesus Christ gave his life as “a ransom for many” (Matt 20:28; Mark 10:45) and became “the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). While sharing a final Passover meal with his disciples, Jesus spoke of the symbolic nature of the wine they shared: “This is my blood, which confirms the covenant. . . . It is poured out as a sacrifice to forgive the sins of many” (Matt 26:28). He embodies and enacts a new Passover: Through his sacrifice, sin and death were fully and finally defeated (see also Isa 25:7-8).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1-51; Lev 23:4-8; Num 9:1-14; 28:16-25; Deut 16:1-7; Matt 26:17-30; Luke 22:15-20; 1 Cor 5:6-8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Passover<\/h3>\n<p>The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate only unleavened bread, just as they had done in their hurried departure from Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>In that first Passover, a lamb was sacrificed that took the place of the firstborn son of every family of Israel (Exod 12:12-13, 23). Passover thus carries the notion that we can be delivered from death only by means of a sacrifice that takes our place. But while Passover marked an event of tremendous significance in Israelite history, the events of the Exodus did not conquer the universal, fundamental problem of death, a problem that stems from sin (1 Cor 15:56).<\/p>\n<p>Many years later, around the time of the Passover festival, Jesus Christ gave his life as “a ransom for many” (Matt 20:28; Mark 10:45) and became “the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). While sharing a final Passover meal with his disciples, Jesus spoke of the symbolic nature of the wine they shared: “This is my blood, which confirms the covenant. . . . It is poured out as a sacrifice to forgive the sins of many” (Matt 26:28). He embodies and enacts a new Passover: Through his sacrifice, sin and death were fully and finally defeated (see also Isa 25:7-8).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1-51; Lev 23:4-8; Num 9:1-14; 28:16-25; Deut 16:1-7; Matt 26:17-30; Luke 22:15-20; 1 Cor 5:6-8<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Passover The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate...","summary_en":"The Passover The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143340,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Atonement","title_en":"Atonement","content_ro":"<h3>Atonement<\/h3>\n<p>Leviticus 16 describes the Day of Atonement. On this day, the high priest presented the sins of the community to the Lord. Worshiping a holy God requires atonement, the removal of any uncleanness or sin that stands in the way. God’s grace permitted the death of an animal to be accepted in exchange for the sinner’s life. In the atoning offerings, the sacrifice represented the life of the worshiper: The animal was sacrificed so that the worshiper might live. God designated the blood of the sacrifice—blood represents life—as the means of atonement (Lev 17:11).<\/p>\n<p>Atonement provides both <em>expiation<\/em> and <em>propitiation.<\/em> Expiation is the payment of what is owed. For example, the guilt offering (5:14–6:7) involves damages or loss to property, and the loss must be repaid with a 20 percent surcharge. Propitiation, on the other hand, involves appeasing or pacifying an offended party. For example, the whole burnt offering (1:1-17) and the sin offering (4:1–5:13) require no discernable payment of a debt.<\/p>\n<p>In the atoning sacrifices, the act of laying hands on the victim (4:4-35; 16:21) indicates identification of the worshiper with the animal being sacrificed. The blood, representing the life of the animal (17:14), is presented in place of the life of the worshiper (17:11). The animal is killed, and its blood and certain parts are ceremonially presented to God, thus cleansing the worshiper and averting God’s wrath.<\/p>\n<p>The blood of Jesus brings atonement (Eph 1:7; Col 1:20) and obtains eternal redemption for believers (Heb 9:12). Christ, God’s lamb, reconciles us to God (John 1:29; Heb 9:14). He paid our debt of sin (expiation) and satisfied God’s judgment against us (propitiation).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:17-22; 30:10-16; Lev 1:1-17; 4:1–6:7; 16:1-34; 17:10-14; 23:26-32; Num 15:22-29; 29:7-11; Ps 51:7; Prov 16:6; Ezek 43:18-27; Dan 9:24; John 1:29; Eph 1:7; Col 1:20; Heb 2:16-17; 9:12-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Atonement<\/h3>\n<p>Leviticus 16 describes the Day of Atonement. On this day, the high priest presented the sins of the community to the Lord. Worshiping a holy God requires atonement, the removal of any uncleanness or sin that stands in the way. God’s grace permitted the death of an animal to be accepted in exchange for the sinner’s life. In the atoning offerings, the sacrifice represented the life of the worshiper: The animal was sacrificed so that the worshiper might live. God designated the blood of the sacrifice—blood represents life—as the means of atonement (Lev 17:11).<\/p>\n<p>Atonement provides both <em>expiation<\/em> and <em>propitiation.<\/em> Expiation is the payment of what is owed. For example, the guilt offering (5:14–6:7) involves damages or loss to property, and the loss must be repaid with a 20 percent surcharge. Propitiation, on the other hand, involves appeasing or pacifying an offended party. For example, the whole burnt offering (1:1-17) and the sin offering (4:1–5:13) require no discernable payment of a debt.<\/p>\n<p>In the atoning sacrifices, the act of laying hands on the victim (4:4-35; 16:21) indicates identification of the worshiper with the animal being sacrificed. The blood, representing the life of the animal (17:14), is presented in place of the life of the worshiper (17:11). The animal is killed, and its blood and certain parts are ceremonially presented to God, thus cleansing the worshiper and averting God’s wrath.<\/p>\n<p>The blood of Jesus brings atonement (Eph 1:7; Col 1:20) and obtains eternal redemption for believers (Heb 9:12). Christ, God’s lamb, reconciles us to God (John 1:29; Heb 9:14). He paid our debt of sin (expiation) and satisfied God’s judgment against us (propitiation).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:17-22; 30:10-16; Lev 1:1-17; 4:1–6:7; 16:1-34; 17:10-14; 23:26-32; Num 15:22-29; 29:7-11; Ps 51:7; Prov 16:6; Ezek 43:18-27; Dan 9:24; John 1:29; Eph 1:7; Col 1:20; Heb 2:16-17; 9:12-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"Atonement Leviticus 16 describes the Day of Atonement. On this day, the high priest presented the sins of the community to the Lord. Worshiping a holy God requires atonement, the removal of any uncleanness or sin that stands in the way. God’s grace permitted the death of an animal to be accepted in exchange for the sinner’s life. In the atoning offerings, the sacrifice represented the life of the worshiper: The animal was sacrificed so that the worshiper might live. God designated the blood o...","summary_en":"Atonement Leviticus 16 describes the Day of Atonement. On this day, the high priest presented the sins of the community to the Lord. Worshiping a holy God requires atonement, the removal of any uncleanness or sin that stands in the way. God’s grace permitted the death of an animal to be accepted in exchange for the sinner’s life. In the atoning offerings, the sacrifice represented the life of the worshiper: The animal was sacrificed so that the worshiper might live. God designated the blood o...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148408,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Encounters with Jesus","title_en":"Encounters with Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","summary_ro":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","summary_en":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148928,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The World","title_en":"The World","content_ro":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","summary_en":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148960,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Cross and Passover","title_en":"The Cross and Passover","content_ro":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","summary_en":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"31":[{"id":19805,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jew","title_en":"Jew","content_ro":"<h3>JEW<\/h3>\n<p>Judean, belonging to Judah. The short form of the English word was developed from the French. The underlying Hebrew word is used first in 2 Kings 16:6 as a national term, meaning citizens of Judah. It came into general use in the period of Jeremiah just before the exile (late sixth century <span>BC<\/span>; see Jer 32:12). It reflects a growing sense of national identity among foreign nations in an international world. In Jeremiah 34:9, a statement concerning the national principle that an individual citizen had the right to freedom from slavery uses the term “Jew.” In Jeremiah 52:28 it is poignantly used in giving the number of deported citizens.<\/p>\n<p>Once the people were in exile, the term’s national meaning was expanded with a religious one. The Jews were different from surrounding peoples in that they preserved a living religious tradition of one true God. A Jewish-Gentile polarization developed. Thus in Daniel 3:8-12 certain Jews are accused of deviating from otherwise acceptable Babylonian religious practices. The book of Esther is concerned with the problem of Jewish identity and survival in a hostile alien environment. Esther 8:17 speaks of Gentiles declaring themselves Jews in the religious sense of becoming proselytes.<\/p>\n<p>After the exile, the strongly religious meaning of “Jew” is expressed in the prophecy of Zechariah 8:23 that the Jew would be courted by Gentiles because God was with him. In Ezra 4:12 the term “Jews” is the national designation of the returned exiles, as it is in the book of Nehemiah (e.g., Neh 1:2; 4:2). In Nehemiah 13:24 there is a consciousness of the social exclusiveness of the Jews: on religious grounds, marriage to foreigners is deplored.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT “Jew” continues to have the same national and\/or religious meaning. Culturally, Jews have religious and other customs that NT documents addressed to Gentiles find it necessary to explain (Mk 7:3; Jn 5:1; 19:40). Jews are contrasted with Gentiles (Acts 11:19), Samaritans (Jn 4:9, 22), and proselytes (Acts 2:10). Jewish Christians can be called “Jews” (Gal 2:13), but there is an increasing stress on the religious distinctions between Jew and Christian. In Romans 2:17-29 Paul gives an interesting theological analysis of the term “Jew.” He is at pains to emphasize that the true meaning of the word lies not in outward religious profession but in an inward attitude to God. Paul was doubtless thinking of the inadequacy of his own life as a Jew before he was converted to the Christian faith (cf. Phil 3:3-6). His mention of “praise” in Romans 2:29 is the climax of the passage. It is a forceful play on words: in Hebrew, Judah means praise (Gn 29:35; cf. 49:8).<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul is here moving in the direction of regarding Christianity as the true heir of the faith of the OT. Revelation 2:9 and 3:9 express similar sentiments: to be truly a Jew is much more than a matter of birth and synagogue observance. Underlying these passages in both Revelation and Romans is obviously the issue of the messianic claims of Jesus (cf. Rom 9:3-5; 10:1-4). The NT bears sad testimony to the opposition of Jews to the Christian message. The gospel proved a cause of offense to the Jews (1 Cor 1:23). Paul himself, despite his claim of impeccable Jewish credentials (Acts 26:4-7), found himself the object of bitter Jewish attacks (21:11; 23:12, 27). Revelation 2:9 and 3:9 describe the Jews’ opposition as satanic: they were carrying out the work of God’s adversary, Satan.<\/p>\n<p>These negative overtones are especially attached to the use of the word “Jew” in John’s Gospel. It is found some 70 times, versus about five or six instances in each of the synoptic Gospels. Some passages, such as those already cited, have no associations of hostility. But in most cases the fourth Gospel uses “Jews” in the sense of the religious authorities, especially those in Jerusalem, who were hostile to Jesus (see, e.g., Jn 5:18; 9:18; 11:8; 18:36). It is noteworthy that in 9:22 the parents of the blind man, clearly Jews themselves, are said, literally, to fear the investigating Jews. In 18:14 “Jews” stands for the chief priests and Pharisees of 18:3. It must be emphasized that the author, who was obviously a Jew himself, was not expressing an anti-Semitic viewpoint as such. He condemned not race or people but those who opposed Jesus. He gladly acknowledged that some Jews put their faith in Jesus (8:31; 11:45: 12:11). Nathanael is featured as a type of the Christian Jew, a true Israelite “in whom is no guile” (1:47; cf. v 31; see Gn 27:35; 32:28).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Diaspora of the Jews; Israel, History of; Judaism; Judaizers; Pharisees; Postexilic Period.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JEW<\/h3>\n<p>Judean, belonging to Judah. The short form of the English word was developed from the French. The underlying Hebrew word is used first in 2 Kings 16:6 as a national term, meaning citizens of Judah. It came into general use in the period of Jeremiah just before the exile (late sixth century <span>BC<\/span>; see Jer 32:12). It reflects a growing sense of national identity among foreign nations in an international world. In Jeremiah 34:9, a statement concerning the national principle that an individual citizen had the right to freedom from slavery uses the term “Jew.” In Jeremiah 52:28 it is poignantly used in giving the number of deported citizens.<\/p>\n<p>Once the people were in exile, the term’s national meaning was expanded with a religious one. The Jews were different from surrounding peoples in that they preserved a living religious tradition of one true God. A Jewish-Gentile polarization developed. Thus in Daniel 3:8-12 certain Jews are accused of deviating from otherwise acceptable Babylonian religious practices. The book of Esther is concerned with the problem of Jewish identity and survival in a hostile alien environment. Esther 8:17 speaks of Gentiles declaring themselves Jews in the religious sense of becoming proselytes.<\/p>\n<p>After the exile, the strongly religious meaning of “Jew” is expressed in the prophecy of Zechariah 8:23 that the Jew would be courted by Gentiles because God was with him. In Ezra 4:12 the term “Jews” is the national designation of the returned exiles, as it is in the book of Nehemiah (e.g., Neh 1:2; 4:2). In Nehemiah 13:24 there is a consciousness of the social exclusiveness of the Jews: on religious grounds, marriage to foreigners is deplored.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT “Jew” continues to have the same national and\/or religious meaning. Culturally, Jews have religious and other customs that NT documents addressed to Gentiles find it necessary to explain (Mk 7:3; Jn 5:1; 19:40). Jews are contrasted with Gentiles (Acts 11:19), Samaritans (Jn 4:9, 22), and proselytes (Acts 2:10). Jewish Christians can be called “Jews” (Gal 2:13), but there is an increasing stress on the religious distinctions between Jew and Christian. In Romans 2:17-29 Paul gives an interesting theological analysis of the term “Jew.” He is at pains to emphasize that the true meaning of the word lies not in outward religious profession but in an inward attitude to God. Paul was doubtless thinking of the inadequacy of his own life as a Jew before he was converted to the Christian faith (cf. Phil 3:3-6). His mention of “praise” in Romans 2:29 is the climax of the passage. It is a forceful play on words: in Hebrew, Judah means praise (Gn 29:35; cf. 49:8).<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul is here moving in the direction of regarding Christianity as the true heir of the faith of the OT. Revelation 2:9 and 3:9 express similar sentiments: to be truly a Jew is much more than a matter of birth and synagogue observance. Underlying these passages in both Revelation and Romans is obviously the issue of the messianic claims of Jesus (cf. Rom 9:3-5; 10:1-4). The NT bears sad testimony to the opposition of Jews to the Christian message. The gospel proved a cause of offense to the Jews (1 Cor 1:23). Paul himself, despite his claim of impeccable Jewish credentials (Acts 26:4-7), found himself the object of bitter Jewish attacks (21:11; 23:12, 27). Revelation 2:9 and 3:9 describe the Jews’ opposition as satanic: they were carrying out the work of God’s adversary, Satan.<\/p>\n<p>These negative overtones are especially attached to the use of the word “Jew” in John’s Gospel. It is found some 70 times, versus about five or six instances in each of the synoptic Gospels. Some passages, such as those already cited, have no associations of hostility. But in most cases the fourth Gospel uses “Jews” in the sense of the religious authorities, especially those in Jerusalem, who were hostile to Jesus (see, e.g., Jn 5:18; 9:18; 11:8; 18:36). It is noteworthy that in 9:22 the parents of the blind man, clearly Jews themselves, are said, literally, to fear the investigating Jews. In 18:14 “Jews” stands for the chief priests and Pharisees of 18:3. It must be emphasized that the author, who was obviously a Jew himself, was not expressing an anti-Semitic viewpoint as such. He condemned not race or people but those who opposed Jesus. He gladly acknowledged that some Jews put their faith in Jesus (8:31; 11:45: 12:11). Nathanael is featured as a type of the Christian Jew, a true Israelite “in whom is no guile” (1:47; cf. v 31; see Gn 27:35; 32:28).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Diaspora of the Jews; Israel, History of; Judaism; Judaizers; Pharisees; Postexilic Period.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JEW Judean, belonging to Judah. The short form of the English word was developed from the French. The underlying Hebrew word is used first in 2 Kings 16:6 as a national term, meaning citizens of Judah. It came into general use in the period of Jeremiah just before the exile (late sixth century BC; see Jer 32:12). It reflects a growing sense of national identity among foreign nations in an international world. In Jeremiah 34:9, a statement concerning the national principle that an individual c...","summary_en":"JEW Judean, belonging to Judah. The short form of the English word was developed from the French. The underlying Hebrew word is used first in 2 Kings 16:6 as a national term, meaning citizens of Judah. It came into general use in the period of Jeremiah just before the exile (late sixth century BC; see Jer 32:12). It reflects a growing sense of national identity among foreign nations in an international world. In Jeremiah 34:9, a statement concerning the national principle that an individual c...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"32":[{"id":2196,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Anointed Ones Anointed One","title_en":"One, Anointed Ones, Anointed","content_ro":"<h3>ANOINTED ONE, ANOINTED ONES<\/h3>\n<p>In the NT, Jesus Christ is portrayed as fulfilling the three offices of prophet, priest, and king. He is, supremely, God’s Anointed One. “Messiah” is the term for “anointed one” derived directly from the Hebrew word for anointed; “Christ” is the same title derived from the Greek word for “anointee.” The true anointing of Messiah (Ps 2:2; Dn 9:25-26) is spiritual; that is, it is done by the Holy Spirit (Is 61:1; Lk 4:1, 18-19). That Jesus of Nazareth was indeed the Anointed One (Messiah) of OT prophecy was evidenced in his anointing by the Holy Spirit and by the miracles that followed (Jn 1:32-51; Lk 4:33-37). By extension, Christians also are said to be anointed by the Holy Spirit, enabling them to understand their faith and to live godly lives (2 Cor 1:21-22; 1 Jn 2:20, 27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Messiah.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ANOINTED ONE, ANOINTED ONES<\/h3>\n<p>In the NT, Jesus Christ is portrayed as fulfilling the three offices of prophet, priest, and king. He is, supremely, God’s Anointed One. “Messiah” is the term for “anointed one” derived directly from the Hebrew word for anointed; “Christ” is the same title derived from the Greek word for “anointee.” The true anointing of Messiah (Ps 2:2; Dn 9:25-26) is spiritual; that is, it is done by the Holy Spirit (Is 61:1; Lk 4:1, 18-19). That Jesus of Nazareth was indeed the Anointed One (Messiah) of OT prophecy was evidenced in his anointing by the Holy Spirit and by the miracles that followed (Jn 1:32-51; Lk 4:33-37). By extension, Christians also are said to be anointed by the Holy Spirit, enabling them to understand their faith and to live godly lives (2 Cor 1:21-22; 1 Jn 2:20, 27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Messiah.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ANOINTED ONE, ANOINTED ONES In the NT, Jesus Christ is portrayed as fulfilling the three offices of prophet, priest, and king. He is, supremely, God’s Anointed One. “Messiah” is the term for “anointed one” derived directly from the Hebrew word for anointed; “Christ” is the same title derived from the Greek word for “anointee.” The true anointing of Messiah (Ps 2:2; Dn 9:25-26) is spiritual; that is, it is done by the Holy Spirit (Is 61:1; Lk 4:1, 18-19). That Jesus of Nazareth was indeed the ...","summary_en":"ANOINTED ONE, ANOINTED ONES In the NT, Jesus Christ is portrayed as fulfilling the three offices of prophet, priest, and king. He is, supremely, God’s Anointed One. “Messiah” is the term for “anointed one” derived directly from the Hebrew word for anointed; “Christ” is the same title derived from the Greek word for “anointee.” The true anointing of Messiah (Ps 2:2; Dn 9:25-26) is spiritual; that is, it is done by the Holy Spirit (Is 61:1; Lk 4:1, 18-19). That Jesus of Nazareth was indeed the ...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":3758,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of Jesus*, Baptism","title_en":"of Jesus*, Baptism","content_ro":"<h3>BAPTISM OF JESUS*<\/h3>\n<p>Major event in Jesus’ life, which marked the beginning of his ministry. The fact that John the Baptist baptized Jesus is disputed by very few scholars today, but the purpose and significance of Jesus’ baptism remain controversial.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel accounts agree that John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance (Mt 3:6-10; Mk 1:4-5; Lk 3:3-14). He proclaimed that the kingdom of heaven was at hand and that God’s people should prepare for the Lord’s coming by a renewal of faith toward God. For John, that meant repentance, confession of sins, and practicing righteousness. That being so, why was Jesus baptized? If Jesus was sinless, as the NT proclaims (2 Cor 5:21; Heb 4:15; 1 Pt 2:22), why did he submit to a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins? The Gospels provide the answers.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelofMark\">The Gospel of Mark<\/p>\n<p>Mark presents the baptism of Jesus as a necessary preparation for his period of temptation and ministry. At his baptism Jesus received the Father’s approval and the bestowal of the Holy Spirit (1:9-11). Mark’s focus on Jesus’ special relation to the Father, “You are my beloved Son, and I am fully pleased with you” (1:11, <span>nlt<\/span>), brings together two important OT references. Jesus’ messiahship is presented in a radically new way, in which the ruling Messiah (Ps 2:7) is also the Suffering Servant of the Lord (Is 42:1). Popular Jewish belief expected a ruling Messiah who would establish the kingdom of God, not a Messiah who would suffer for the people. Mark intended to show that in Jesus alone had God’s appointed time for the fulfillment of his purpose come.<\/p>\n<p>The statement that the heavens opened at the baptism of Jesus (Mk 1:10) may proclaim the arrival of the “end times” (the time of fulfillment and the establishment of God’s kingdom). A then-current Jewish interpretation of Isaiah 64:1 held that in the last days God would open the heavens and come down to his people. In Jewish thought the rending of the heavens was also associated with hearing God’s voice and the bestowal of God’s Spirit.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelofMatthew\">The Gospel of Matthew<\/p>\n<p>Matthew’s account of Jesus’ baptism has more detail than Mark’s. It begins by noting John’s reluctance to baptize Jesus (3:14). John was persuaded only after Jesus explained to him that the act was “fitting for us to fulfil all righteousness” (3:15, <span>rsv<\/span>). Although the full meaning of those words is uncertain, they at least suggest that Jesus’ baptism was necessary to accomplish God’s will. In both the Old and New Testaments (Ps 98:2-3; Rom 1:17) God’s righteousness is seen in his salvation for his people. That is why the Messiah can be called “The <span>Lord<\/span> Is Our Righteousness” (Jer 23:6; cf. Is 11:1-5). Jesus told John that his baptism was necessary to do God’s will in bringing about salvation for his people. Thus the Father’s declaration at Jesus’ baptism is presented in the form of a public announcement, emphasizing that Jesus was God’s anointed Servant about to begin his ministry as the bringer of the Lord’s salvation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelofLuke\">The Gospel of Luke<\/p>\n<p>Luke passes over Jesus’ baptism quickly, placing it alongside the baptism of others who came to John (3:21-22). The context in Luke also sheds some light on the purpose of Jesus’ baptism. Luke, unlike Matthew, places the genealogy of Jesus after his baptism and just before his ministry begins. The parallel to Moses, whose genealogy occurs just before his primary work begins (Ex 6:14-25), seems more than coincidental. It is probably intended to illustrate Jesus’ role in bringing deliverance (salvation) to God’s people just as Moses did in the OT. At his baptism, by the descent of the Holy Spirit upon him, Jesus was equipped to do the mission God had called him to do. Following his temptation (Lk 4:1-13), Jesus entered the synagogue and declared to the people that he had been anointed by the Spirit to proclaim good news (4:16-21). That anointing came at Jesus’ baptism (cf. Acts 10:37-38).<\/p>\n<p>In his Gospel account, Luke tried to identify Jesus with the common people—for example, in the birth story (with Jesus born in a stable and visited by lowly shepherds, Lk 2:8-20) and through placing the genealogy (stressing Jesus’ relation to all of humanity, 3:38) right after the baptism. Thus, Luke saw the baptism as Jesus’ first step in identifying himself with those he had come to save.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the Messiah was always inseparable from the people he represented (see especially Jer 30:21 and Ez 45–46). Although the “servant” in Isaiah is sometimes viewed corporately (Is 44:1) and sometimes individually (53:3), he is always viewed as the representative <em>of the people<\/em> to the Lord (49:5-26), as well as the servant <em>of the Lord.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Evidently Luke, along with Mark and Matthew, was trying to show that Jesus, as the divine representative of the people, had identified himself with them in his baptism.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelofJohn\">The Gospel of John<\/p>\n<p>The fourth Gospel does not say that Jesus was baptized but does say that John the Baptist saw the Spirit descend upon Jesus (Jn 1:32-34). The account emphasizes that Jesus went to John during John’s preaching and baptizing ministry; John recognized that Jesus was the Christ, that God’s Spirit was upon him, and that he was the Son of God. John also recognized that Jesus, unlike himself, baptized with the Holy Spirit (1:29-36).<\/p>\n<p>John the Baptist described Jesus as the “Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (1:29, <span>nlt<\/span>). The closest OT parallel to that statement comes from a “servant of the Lord” passage (Is 53:6-7). It is possible that “Lamb of God” could be an alternate translation of the Aramaic term “servant of God.”<\/p>\n<p>The sense of Jesus as the one who bears the sins of the people is obviously in view in the fourth Gospel. That Jesus was the promised representative and deliverer of the people was understood by John the Baptist and conveyed by the Gospel writer.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>In the four Gospels it is clear that the Holy Spirit came upon Jesus at his baptism to enable him to do the work of God. All four Gospel writers saw that Jesus had been anointed by God to accomplish his mission of bringing salvation to the people. Those ideas provide a key to understanding why Jesus was baptized. On that occasion at the beginning of his ministry, God anointed Jesus with the Holy Spirit to do his mediating work between God and the people. At his baptism Jesus was identified as the one who would bear the people’s sins; Jesus was baptized to identify himself with sinful people.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BAPTISM OF JESUS*<\/h3>\n<p>Major event in Jesus’ life, which marked the beginning of his ministry. The fact that John the Baptist baptized Jesus is disputed by very few scholars today, but the purpose and significance of Jesus’ baptism remain controversial.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel accounts agree that John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance (Mt 3:6-10; Mk 1:4-5; Lk 3:3-14). He proclaimed that the kingdom of heaven was at hand and that God’s people should prepare for the Lord’s coming by a renewal of faith toward God. For John, that meant repentance, confession of sins, and practicing righteousness. That being so, why was Jesus baptized? If Jesus was sinless, as the NT proclaims (2 Cor 5:21; Heb 4:15; 1 Pt 2:22), why did he submit to a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins? The Gospels provide the answers.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelofMark\">The Gospel of Mark<\/p>\n<p>Mark presents the baptism of Jesus as a necessary preparation for his period of temptation and ministry. At his baptism Jesus received the Father’s approval and the bestowal of the Holy Spirit (1:9-11). Mark’s focus on Jesus’ special relation to the Father, “You are my beloved Son, and I am fully pleased with you” (1:11, <span>nlt<\/span>), brings together two important OT references. Jesus’ messiahship is presented in a radically new way, in which the ruling Messiah (Ps 2:7) is also the Suffering Servant of the Lord (Is 42:1). Popular Jewish belief expected a ruling Messiah who would establish the kingdom of God, not a Messiah who would suffer for the people. Mark intended to show that in Jesus alone had God’s appointed time for the fulfillment of his purpose come.<\/p>\n<p>The statement that the heavens opened at the baptism of Jesus (Mk 1:10) may proclaim the arrival of the “end times” (the time of fulfillment and the establishment of God’s kingdom). A then-current Jewish interpretation of Isaiah 64:1 held that in the last days God would open the heavens and come down to his people. In Jewish thought the rending of the heavens was also associated with hearing God’s voice and the bestowal of God’s Spirit.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelofMatthew\">The Gospel of Matthew<\/p>\n<p>Matthew’s account of Jesus’ baptism has more detail than Mark’s. It begins by noting John’s reluctance to baptize Jesus (3:14). John was persuaded only after Jesus explained to him that the act was “fitting for us to fulfil all righteousness” (3:15, <span>rsv<\/span>). Although the full meaning of those words is uncertain, they at least suggest that Jesus’ baptism was necessary to accomplish God’s will. In both the Old and New Testaments (Ps 98:2-3; Rom 1:17) God’s righteousness is seen in his salvation for his people. That is why the Messiah can be called “The <span>Lord<\/span> Is Our Righteousness” (Jer 23:6; cf. Is 11:1-5). Jesus told John that his baptism was necessary to do God’s will in bringing about salvation for his people. Thus the Father’s declaration at Jesus’ baptism is presented in the form of a public announcement, emphasizing that Jesus was God’s anointed Servant about to begin his ministry as the bringer of the Lord’s salvation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelofLuke\">The Gospel of Luke<\/p>\n<p>Luke passes over Jesus’ baptism quickly, placing it alongside the baptism of others who came to John (3:21-22). The context in Luke also sheds some light on the purpose of Jesus’ baptism. Luke, unlike Matthew, places the genealogy of Jesus after his baptism and just before his ministry begins. The parallel to Moses, whose genealogy occurs just before his primary work begins (Ex 6:14-25), seems more than coincidental. It is probably intended to illustrate Jesus’ role in bringing deliverance (salvation) to God’s people just as Moses did in the OT. At his baptism, by the descent of the Holy Spirit upon him, Jesus was equipped to do the mission God had called him to do. Following his temptation (Lk 4:1-13), Jesus entered the synagogue and declared to the people that he had been anointed by the Spirit to proclaim good news (4:16-21). That anointing came at Jesus’ baptism (cf. Acts 10:37-38).<\/p>\n<p>In his Gospel account, Luke tried to identify Jesus with the common people—for example, in the birth story (with Jesus born in a stable and visited by lowly shepherds, Lk 2:8-20) and through placing the genealogy (stressing Jesus’ relation to all of humanity, 3:38) right after the baptism. Thus, Luke saw the baptism as Jesus’ first step in identifying himself with those he had come to save.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the Messiah was always inseparable from the people he represented (see especially Jer 30:21 and Ez 45–46). Although the “servant” in Isaiah is sometimes viewed corporately (Is 44:1) and sometimes individually (53:3), he is always viewed as the representative <em>of the people<\/em> to the Lord (49:5-26), as well as the servant <em>of the Lord.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Evidently Luke, along with Mark and Matthew, was trying to show that Jesus, as the divine representative of the people, had identified himself with them in his baptism.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelofJohn\">The Gospel of John<\/p>\n<p>The fourth Gospel does not say that Jesus was baptized but does say that John the Baptist saw the Spirit descend upon Jesus (Jn 1:32-34). The account emphasizes that Jesus went to John during John’s preaching and baptizing ministry; John recognized that Jesus was the Christ, that God’s Spirit was upon him, and that he was the Son of God. John also recognized that Jesus, unlike himself, baptized with the Holy Spirit (1:29-36).<\/p>\n<p>John the Baptist described Jesus as the “Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (1:29, <span>nlt<\/span>). The closest OT parallel to that statement comes from a “servant of the Lord” passage (Is 53:6-7). It is possible that “Lamb of God” could be an alternate translation of the Aramaic term “servant of God.”<\/p>\n<p>The sense of Jesus as the one who bears the sins of the people is obviously in view in the fourth Gospel. That Jesus was the promised representative and deliverer of the people was understood by John the Baptist and conveyed by the Gospel writer.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>In the four Gospels it is clear that the Holy Spirit came upon Jesus at his baptism to enable him to do the work of God. All four Gospel writers saw that Jesus had been anointed by God to accomplish his mission of bringing salvation to the people. Those ideas provide a key to understanding why Jesus was baptized. On that occasion at the beginning of his ministry, God anointed Jesus with the Holy Spirit to do his mediating work between God and the people. At his baptism Jesus was identified as the one who would bear the people’s sins; Jesus was baptized to identify himself with sinful people.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BAPTISM OF JESUS* Major event in Jesus’ life, which marked the beginning of his ministry. The fact that John the Baptist baptized Jesus is disputed by very few scholars today, but the purpose and significance of Jesus’ baptism remain controversial. The Gospel accounts agree that John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance (Mt 3:6-10; Mk 1:4-5; Lk 3:3-14). He proclaimed that the kingdom of heaven was at hand and that God’s people should prepare for the Lord’s coming by a renewal of faith toward...","summary_en":"BAPTISM OF JESUS* Major event in Jesus’ life, which marked the beginning of his ministry. The fact that John the Baptist baptized Jesus is disputed by very few scholars today, but the purpose and significance of Jesus’ baptism remain controversial. The Gospel accounts agree that John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance (Mt 3:6-10; Mk 1:4-5; Lk 3:3-14). He proclaimed that the kingdom of heaven was at hand and that God’s people should prepare for the Lord’s coming by a renewal of faith toward...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":34803,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Shekinah*","title_en":"Shekinah*","content_ro":"<h3>SHEKINAH*<\/h3>\n<p>Transliteration of a Hebrew word meaning “the one who dwells” or “that which dwells.” The term enters Christian theology from its use in the Targums and rabbinic literature to describe the immanent presence in the world of the transcendent Deity. Although the word is not itself used in either Testament, it clearly originates in OT passages that describe God as dwelling among a people or in a particular place (Gn 9:27; Ex 25:8; 29:45-46; Nm 5:3; 1 Kgs 6:13; Pss 68:16-18; 74:2; Is 8:18; Ez 43:7-9; Jl 3:17, 21; Zec 2:10-11); God, whose dwelling is in heaven, also dwells on earth. The term is also applied to the “shekinah glory,” the visible pillar of fire and smoke that dwelled in the midst of Israel at Sinai (Ex 19:16-18), in the wilderness (40:34-38), and in the temple (1 Kgs 6:13; 8:10-13; 2 Chr 6:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The NT frequently alludes to the concept of the shekinah, even though the term itself is not used. God’s presence in the NT is frequently associated with light and glory (Lk 2:9; 9:29; Acts 9:3-6; 22:6-11; 26:12-16; 2 Pt 1:16-18). John’s Gospel emphasizes both the concept of glory and the concept of dwelling. When the Word became flesh, he dwelt among men who beheld his glory (Jn 1:14). The Spirit of God remained on him (v 32) and would be with his followers forever (14:16). He would abide in those who abide in Jesus (15:4-10). The same themes of dwelling in Christ and of his dwelling in his people occur repeatedly also in John’s letters (1 Jn 2:6, 14, 24, 27-28; 3:6, 14-15, 24; 2 Jn 1:9).<\/p>\n<p>Paul also identifies Christ as the shekinah of God. All the fullness of the Godhead dwells in him bodily (Col 1:19; 2:9). The dwelling of Christ in the church constitutes the saints as the people of God (1:15-23). Paul’s message was the “gospel of the glory of Christ,” for God had caused light to shine to give “knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ” (2 Cor 4:4-6, <span>niv<\/span>). Finally, the writer of Hebrews sees Christ as “the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being” (Heb 1:3, <span>niv<\/span>). <em>See<\/em> Glory; Pillar of Fire and Cloud; Theophany.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SHEKINAH*<\/h3>\n<p>Transliteration of a Hebrew word meaning “the one who dwells” or “that which dwells.” The term enters Christian theology from its use in the Targums and rabbinic literature to describe the immanent presence in the world of the transcendent Deity. Although the word is not itself used in either Testament, it clearly originates in OT passages that describe God as dwelling among a people or in a particular place (Gn 9:27; Ex 25:8; 29:45-46; Nm 5:3; 1 Kgs 6:13; Pss 68:16-18; 74:2; Is 8:18; Ez 43:7-9; Jl 3:17, 21; Zec 2:10-11); God, whose dwelling is in heaven, also dwells on earth. The term is also applied to the “shekinah glory,” the visible pillar of fire and smoke that dwelled in the midst of Israel at Sinai (Ex 19:16-18), in the wilderness (40:34-38), and in the temple (1 Kgs 6:13; 8:10-13; 2 Chr 6:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The NT frequently alludes to the concept of the shekinah, even though the term itself is not used. God’s presence in the NT is frequently associated with light and glory (Lk 2:9; 9:29; Acts 9:3-6; 22:6-11; 26:12-16; 2 Pt 1:16-18). John’s Gospel emphasizes both the concept of glory and the concept of dwelling. When the Word became flesh, he dwelt among men who beheld his glory (Jn 1:14). The Spirit of God remained on him (v 32) and would be with his followers forever (14:16). He would abide in those who abide in Jesus (15:4-10). The same themes of dwelling in Christ and of his dwelling in his people occur repeatedly also in John’s letters (1 Jn 2:6, 14, 24, 27-28; 3:6, 14-15, 24; 2 Jn 1:9).<\/p>\n<p>Paul also identifies Christ as the shekinah of God. All the fullness of the Godhead dwells in him bodily (Col 1:19; 2:9). The dwelling of Christ in the church constitutes the saints as the people of God (1:15-23). Paul’s message was the “gospel of the glory of Christ,” for God had caused light to shine to give “knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ” (2 Cor 4:4-6, <span>niv<\/span>). Finally, the writer of Hebrews sees Christ as “the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being” (Heb 1:3, <span>niv<\/span>). <em>See<\/em> Glory; Pillar of Fire and Cloud; Theophany.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SHEKINAH* Transliteration of a Hebrew word meaning “the one who dwells” or “that which dwells.” The term enters Christian theology from its use in the Targums and rabbinic literature to describe the immanent presence in the world of the transcendent Deity. Although the word is not itself used in either Testament, it clearly originates in OT passages that describe God as dwelling among a people or in a particular place (Gn 9:27; Ex 25:8; 29:45-46; Nm 5:3; 1 Kgs 6:13; Pss 68:16-18; 74:2; Is 8:1...","summary_en":"SHEKINAH* Transliteration of a Hebrew word meaning “the one who dwells” or “that which dwells.” The term enters Christian theology from its use in the Targums and rabbinic literature to describe the immanent presence in the world of the transcendent Deity. Although the word is not itself used in either Testament, it clearly originates in OT passages that describe God as dwelling among a people or in a particular place (Gn 9:27; Ex 25:8; 29:45-46; Nm 5:3; 1 Kgs 6:13; Pss 68:16-18; 74:2; Is 8:1...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56329,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:32","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:32","content_ro":"<p><strong>1:32<\/strong> John the Baptist’s second testimony (see 1:19-23) told what happened when Jesus was baptized. • In the Old Testament, kings and prophets were anointed with <em>the Holy Spirit<\/em><em>,<\/em> but these anointings were temporary and tied to a particular office or occasion. By contrast, with the Spirit’s <em>resting<\/em> on him, Jesus’ anointing was permanent (see 3:34).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>1:32<\/strong> John the Baptist’s second testimony (see 1:19-23) told what happened when Jesus was baptized. • In the Old Testament, kings and prophets were anointed with <em>the Holy Spirit<\/em><em>,<\/em> but these anointings were temporary and tied to a particular office or occasion. By contrast, with the Spirit’s <em>resting<\/em> on him, Jesus’ anointing was permanent (see 3:34).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:32 John the Baptist’s second testimony (see 1:19-23) told what happened when Jesus was baptized. • In the Old Testament, kings and prophets were anointed with the Holy Spirit, but these anointings were temporary and tied to a particular office or occasion. By contrast, with the Spirit’s resting on him, Jesus’ anointing was permanent (see 3:34).","summary_en":"1:32 John the Baptist’s second testimony (see 1:19-23) told what happened when Jesus was baptized. • In the Old Testament, kings and prophets were anointed with the Holy Spirit, but these anointings were temporary and tied to a particular office or occasion. By contrast, with the Spirit’s resting on him, Jesus’ anointing was permanent (see 3:34).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83955,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:32","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:32","content_ro":"<p><strong>1:32<\/strong> John the Baptist’s second testimony (see 1:19-23) told what happened when Jesus was baptized. • In the Old Testament, kings and prophets were anointed with <em>the Holy Spirit<\/em><em>,<\/em> but these anointings were temporary and tied to a particular office or occasion. By contrast, with the Spirit’s <em>resting<\/em> on him, Jesus’ anointing was permanent (see 3:34).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>1:32<\/strong> John the Baptist’s second testimony (see 1:19-23) told what happened when Jesus was baptized. • In the Old Testament, kings and prophets were anointed with <em>the Holy Spirit<\/em><em>,<\/em> but these anointings were temporary and tied to a particular office or occasion. By contrast, with the Spirit’s <em>resting<\/em> on him, Jesus’ anointing was permanent (see 3:34).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:32 John the Baptist’s second testimony (see 1:19-23) told what happened when Jesus was baptized. • In the Old Testament, kings and prophets were anointed with the Holy Spirit, but these anointings were temporary and tied to a particular office or occasion. By contrast, with the Spirit’s resting on him, Jesus’ anointing was permanent (see 3:34).","summary_en":"1:32 John the Baptist’s second testimony (see 1:19-23) told what happened when Jesus was baptized. • In the Old Testament, kings and prophets were anointed with the Holy Spirit, but these anointings were temporary and tied to a particular office or occasion. By contrast, with the Spirit’s resting on him, Jesus’ anointing was permanent (see 3:34).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111581,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:32","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:32","content_ro":"<p><strong>1:32<\/strong> John the Baptist’s second testimony (see 1:19-23) told what happened when Jesus was baptized. • In the Old Testament, kings and prophets were anointed with <em>the Holy Spirit<\/em><em>,<\/em> but these anointings were temporary and tied to a particular office or occasion. By contrast, with the Spirit’s <em>resting<\/em> on him, Jesus’ anointing was permanent (see 3:34).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>1:32<\/strong> John the Baptist’s second testimony (see 1:19-23) told what happened when Jesus was baptized. • In the Old Testament, kings and prophets were anointed with <em>the Holy Spirit<\/em><em>,<\/em> but these anointings were temporary and tied to a particular office or occasion. By contrast, with the Spirit’s <em>resting<\/em> on him, Jesus’ anointing was permanent (see 3:34).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:32 John the Baptist’s second testimony (see 1:19-23) told what happened when Jesus was baptized. • In the Old Testament, kings and prophets were anointed with the Holy Spirit, but these anointings were temporary and tied to a particular office or occasion. By contrast, with the Spirit’s resting on him, Jesus’ anointing was permanent (see 3:34).","summary_en":"1:32 John the Baptist’s second testimony (see 1:19-23) told what happened when Jesus was baptized. • In the Old Testament, kings and prophets were anointed with the Holy Spirit, but these anointings were temporary and tied to a particular office or occasion. By contrast, with the Spirit’s resting on him, Jesus’ anointing was permanent (see 3:34).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139207,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:32","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:32","content_ro":"<p><strong>1:32<\/strong> John the Baptist’s second testimony (see 1:19-23) told what happened when Jesus was baptized. • In the Old Testament, kings and prophets were anointed with <em>the Holy Spirit<\/em><em>,<\/em> but these anointings were temporary and tied to a particular office or occasion. By contrast, with the Spirit’s <em>resting<\/em> on him, Jesus’ anointing was permanent (see 3:34).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>1:32<\/strong> John the Baptist’s second testimony (see 1:19-23) told what happened when Jesus was baptized. • In the Old Testament, kings and prophets were anointed with <em>the Holy Spirit<\/em><em>,<\/em> but these anointings were temporary and tied to a particular office or occasion. By contrast, with the Spirit’s <em>resting<\/em> on him, Jesus’ anointing was permanent (see 3:34).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:32 John the Baptist’s second testimony (see 1:19-23) told what happened when Jesus was baptized. • In the Old Testament, kings and prophets were anointed with the Holy Spirit, but these anointings were temporary and tied to a particular office or occasion. By contrast, with the Spirit’s resting on him, Jesus’ anointing was permanent (see 3:34).","summary_en":"1:32 John the Baptist’s second testimony (see 1:19-23) told what happened when Jesus was baptized. • In the Old Testament, kings and prophets were anointed with the Holy Spirit, but these anointings were temporary and tied to a particular office or occasion. By contrast, with the Spirit’s resting on him, Jesus’ anointing was permanent (see 3:34).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"33":[{"id":42400,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","summary_en":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":70026,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","summary_en":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97652,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","summary_en":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125278,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","summary_en":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":3764,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of the Spirit*, Baptism","title_en":"of the Spirit*, Baptism","content_ro":"<h3>BAPTISM OF THE SPIRIT*<\/h3>\n<p>A popularly used phrase, which never occurs as such in the Bible. The NT always uses the verbal phrase “baptize [or baptized] in the Spirit.” That gives it a dynamic character that the noun phrase cannot fully convey.<\/p>\n<p>The phrase seems to have been coined by John the Baptist: “I baptize you with water; but he [the One who is to come] will baptize you in the Holy Spirit and in fire” (Mt 3:11; Lk 3:16; but Mk 1:8 and Jn 1:33 omit the words “and fire”). The phrase is clearly a metaphor: it stands in contrast to and as the fulfillment of John’s water baptism. It is a metaphor of <em>judgment,<\/em> as the context in Matthew and Luke makes clear. Purification or destruction in a river of fire, by a spirit of cleansing, in the fiery breath of God (“breath” and “spirit” are the same word in Hebrew), was familiar imagery in Jewish thought (Is 4:4; 30:27-28; Dn 7:10). It is also a metaphor of <em>mercy,<\/em> since the purification cleanses; after winnowing, the grain would be gathered into the barn (Mt 3:11-12). And, finally, it is a metaphor of <em>initiation<\/em>—John the Baptist’s variation on “the messianic woes,” the expectation that the messianic age would be introduced only through suffering and tribulation (e.g., Dn 7:19-22; 12:1; Zec 14:12-15; also the pseudepigraphal 1 Enoch 100:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Acts the metaphor retains the initiatory significance given it by John the Baptist. Acts 2:4 fulfills the promise of Acts 1:5. Since the outpouring of the Spirit was seen as <em>the<\/em> mark of “the last days” (Is 44:3; Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28-29), it was by being thus baptized in Spirit that the disciples <em>began<\/em> to experience the last days for themselves (Acts 2:1-7, 18). Acts 11:17 speaks of Pentecost as the occasion when they came to believe in Jesus Christ as Lord. Similarly the apostle Paul sees the gift of the Spirit as the beginning of Christian experience (2 Cor 1:22; Gal 3:3), so that “having the Spirit of Christ” is the defining mark of the Christian (Rom 8:9). By being baptized in the Spirit, Cornelius and his friends received the forgiveness and salvation that Peter promised them (Acts 10:43-45; 11:13-18). “Baptized in Spirit” is there synonymous with “granted repentance unto life” (11:18) and “cleansed their hearts by faith” (15:8-9). <em>See<\/em> Baptism; Baptism of Fire; Spiritual Gifts.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BAPTISM OF THE SPIRIT*<\/h3>\n<p>A popularly used phrase, which never occurs as such in the Bible. The NT always uses the verbal phrase “baptize [or baptized] in the Spirit.” That gives it a dynamic character that the noun phrase cannot fully convey.<\/p>\n<p>The phrase seems to have been coined by John the Baptist: “I baptize you with water; but he [the One who is to come] will baptize you in the Holy Spirit and in fire” (Mt 3:11; Lk 3:16; but Mk 1:8 and Jn 1:33 omit the words “and fire”). The phrase is clearly a metaphor: it stands in contrast to and as the fulfillment of John’s water baptism. It is a metaphor of <em>judgment,<\/em> as the context in Matthew and Luke makes clear. Purification or destruction in a river of fire, by a spirit of cleansing, in the fiery breath of God (“breath” and “spirit” are the same word in Hebrew), was familiar imagery in Jewish thought (Is 4:4; 30:27-28; Dn 7:10). It is also a metaphor of <em>mercy,<\/em> since the purification cleanses; after winnowing, the grain would be gathered into the barn (Mt 3:11-12). And, finally, it is a metaphor of <em>initiation<\/em>—John the Baptist’s variation on “the messianic woes,” the expectation that the messianic age would be introduced only through suffering and tribulation (e.g., Dn 7:19-22; 12:1; Zec 14:12-15; also the pseudepigraphal 1 Enoch 100:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Acts the metaphor retains the initiatory significance given it by John the Baptist. Acts 2:4 fulfills the promise of Acts 1:5. Since the outpouring of the Spirit was seen as <em>the<\/em> mark of “the last days” (Is 44:3; Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28-29), it was by being thus baptized in Spirit that the disciples <em>began<\/em> to experience the last days for themselves (Acts 2:1-7, 18). Acts 11:17 speaks of Pentecost as the occasion when they came to believe in Jesus Christ as Lord. Similarly the apostle Paul sees the gift of the Spirit as the beginning of Christian experience (2 Cor 1:22; Gal 3:3), so that “having the Spirit of Christ” is the defining mark of the Christian (Rom 8:9). By being baptized in the Spirit, Cornelius and his friends received the forgiveness and salvation that Peter promised them (Acts 10:43-45; 11:13-18). “Baptized in Spirit” is there synonymous with “granted repentance unto life” (11:18) and “cleansed their hearts by faith” (15:8-9). <em>See<\/em> Baptism; Baptism of Fire; Spiritual Gifts.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BAPTISM OF THE SPIRIT* A popularly used phrase, which never occurs as such in the Bible. The NT always uses the verbal phrase “baptize [or baptized] in the Spirit.” That gives it a dynamic character that the noun phrase cannot fully convey. The phrase seems to have been coined by John the Baptist: “I baptize you with water; but he [the One who is to come] will baptize you in the Holy Spirit and in fire” (Mt 3:11; Lk 3:16; but Mk 1:8 and Jn 1:33 omit the words “and fire”). The phrase is clearl...","summary_en":"BAPTISM OF THE SPIRIT* A popularly used phrase, which never occurs as such in the Bible. The NT always uses the verbal phrase “baptize [or baptized] in the Spirit.” That gives it a dynamic character that the noun phrase cannot fully convey. The phrase seems to have been coined by John the Baptist: “I baptize you with water; but he [the One who is to come] will baptize you in the Holy Spirit and in fire” (Mt 3:11; Lk 3:16; but Mk 1:8 and Jn 1:33 omit the words “and fire”). The phrase is clearl...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":7929,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Covenant, the New","title_en":"Covenant, the New","content_ro":"<h3>COVENANT, The New<\/h3>\n<p>A gracious provision of God given through Jesus Christ for the redemption of fallen humanity—replacing and fulfilling the old covenant, which was expressed primarily through the Mosaic law. The expression “new covenant” is found principally in the NT.<\/p>\n<p>Although the concept of a new covenant is found in several places in the OT (Ez 34:23-31; 37:24-28; Jl 2:12-32), the actual phrase occurs only once (Jer 31:31-34). That passage contrasts the new covenant that the prophet Jeremiah saw God making with Israel “after those days” (vv 32-34) with the covenant God had made with his people in the days of Moses. The contrast is seen, first of all, in the internal nature of the new covenant. Whereas the old covenant was written on tablets of stone (Ex 31:18; 34:27-32; Dt 4:13; 5:22; 9:11; 10:3-4) and in a book (Ex 24:7; cf. the phrase “old written code,” Rom 7:6, <span>rsv<\/span>), the new covenant is to be written on the human heart. One result is a clearer revelation of what God demands; another is the enablement of believers to fulfill those demands (see Rom 8:2-4). The interior nature of the new covenant is spoken of in several other passages (Ez 11:19-21; 36:26-27) and made explicit in the prophet Joel of a time when God “will pour out [his] spirit on all flesh” (Jl 2:28-32).<\/p>\n<p>A second contrast is in the way God’s people know him under the two covenants. There is no doubt that Israel under the old covenant “knew” God; God had revealed himself, though at times the nation tended to forget this (Jgs 2:10; Hos 4:1, 6). What the prophets envisioned in the new covenant is a unique personal knowledge of God by each individual member of the covenant community.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the two covenants differ in regard to God’s dealing with human sin. Jeremiah promised that God would forgive the iniquity of his people and blot out their sin. Israel already knew that God delighted in mercy and forgiveness (Ex 34:6-7), but Jeremiah was saying that God would never again remember their sin (Jer 31:34). Under the old covenant there was a reminder of sin year after year (Heb 10:3); under the new covenant no remembrance of sin remains (v 14).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ANewCovenant\">A New Covenant<\/p>\n<p>The expression “new covenant” is found at least six times in the NT (1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6; Heb 8:8, 13; 9:15; 12:24; and probably Lk 22:20, according to some manuscripts). In certain Greek manuscripts the phrase is also found in Matthew 26:28 and Mark 14:24, where “new” seems to have been added by various scribes to “blood of the covenant,” in order to make these accounts conform to parallel accounts of the Lord’s Supper in 1 Corinthians or possibly in Luke.<\/p>\n<p>Even though the term “new” is not found in the accounts in Matthew and Mark in the best Greek manuscripts, and was therefore probably not part of the original text, it is clear from all four accounts that Jesus saw the Lord’s Supper as instituting a different and therefore “new” covenant. The covenant was being sealed by his sacrificial death, that is, by his blood, just as the Mosaic covenant was sealed by the “blood of the covenant” (Ex 24:6-8). The cup of the Lord’s Supper symbolizes the blood of Christ’s sacrifice, sealing the new covenant God has at last made with his people. The new covenant, ratified by Christ’s death, is what the church therefore commemorates each time it celebrates the Lord’s Supper.<\/p>\n<p>In his institution of the Lord’s Supper, Jesus did not elucidate what the “newness” of the covenant entailed. Elsewhere he mentioned a “baptism with the Holy Spirit” (Acts 1:5; 11:16; cf. Mt 3:11; Mk 1:8; Lk 3:16; and Jn 1:33, where this promise is found on the lips of John the Baptist; cf. also 1 Cor 12:13). Yet both OT prophecies refer to the same new covenant that God would establish in the future, as shown in 2 Corinthians 3:6. There the apostle Paul stated that God “has qualified us to be ministers of a new covenant” (<span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Jer 31:31), not “in a written code but in the Spirit” (<span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Jl 2:28-32), for “the written code kills, but the Spirit gives life” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SuperiorityoftheNewCovenant\">Superiority of the New Covenant<\/p>\n<p>In 2 Corinthians 3, Paul was showing that in contrast to the old (Mosaic) covenant (v 14), which was a dispensation of death, carved in letters on stone (v 7), the new covenant instituted by Jesus is one of far greater splendor (vv 8-9), written on the human heart by the Spirit of the living God himself (v 3).<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant concept is treated most exhaustively and systematically in the book of Hebrews. In Hebrews 8:8-12 the quotation of Jeremiah 31:31-34 is the longest OT quotation found in the NT. In Hebrews 12:24 a different Greek word for “new” is used, but the meaning remains the same. The theme of the new covenant dominates the book of Hebrews, which was written to encourage faltering Christians by demonstrating the superiority of the Christian faith over their old Jewish beliefs and practices. In Hebrews the new covenant is seen as better than the old “obsolete” covenant in a number of ways.<\/p>\n<p>1. The new covenant has a better priesthood than the old covenant, since there is no longer any need for a continual change of priests due to death (Heb 7:23). One continual priest now lives forever to make intercession before God on behalf of his people (vv 24-25).<\/p>\n<li>2. The new covenant priest is better than those of the old covenant, since Jesus does not have to offer sacrifices continually for his own sins and then for the sins of his people. He has instead made one complete and perfect offering (7:27; 9:25-28; 10:12).<\/li>\n<li>3. The new covenant has a better sacrifice than the old covenant; what the blood of bulls and goats could not do, since the atonement they brought could at best be only partial (10:2-3), the blood of Christ has done once for all (9:11-14; 10:1-10).<\/li>\n<li>4. The new covenant is built on “better promises” than the old (8:6).<\/li>\n<li>5. Whereas the old covenant was imperfect (8:7) and thus became obsolete (8:13), the new covenant is perfect and eternal (13:20).<\/li>\n<li>6. Whereas the old covenant provided a believer with no direct access to God (9:6-8), the new covenant provides a direct access to God that can purify and perfect the believer’s conscience (cf. 9:14 with 9:9).<\/li>\n<li>7. The new covenant possesses a better “surety,” or guarantee, an oath sworn by God himself (7:20-22).<\/li>\n<li>8. The new covenant assures the presence of the Holy Spirit in the life of each believer. The new covenant community has been touched by the promised Spirit (6:4), who, according to Paul, is both the seal and guarantee of their inheritance (see 2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:13-14).<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant and its accompanying new commandment are both fulfillments of what was implicit in the old. The new covenant is written on the heart of each member of the new covenant community by the Holy Spirit. The power of God’s Spirit within, enabling the believer to carry out the new commandment (Rom 8:2-4; Gal 5:16-25), is a distinctive feature of the new covenant.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Covenant.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COVENANT, The New<\/h3>\n<p>A gracious provision of God given through Jesus Christ for the redemption of fallen humanity—replacing and fulfilling the old covenant, which was expressed primarily through the Mosaic law. The expression “new covenant” is found principally in the NT.<\/p>\n<p>Although the concept of a new covenant is found in several places in the OT (Ez 34:23-31; 37:24-28; Jl 2:12-32), the actual phrase occurs only once (Jer 31:31-34). That passage contrasts the new covenant that the prophet Jeremiah saw God making with Israel “after those days” (vv 32-34) with the covenant God had made with his people in the days of Moses. The contrast is seen, first of all, in the internal nature of the new covenant. Whereas the old covenant was written on tablets of stone (Ex 31:18; 34:27-32; Dt 4:13; 5:22; 9:11; 10:3-4) and in a book (Ex 24:7; cf. the phrase “old written code,” Rom 7:6, <span>rsv<\/span>), the new covenant is to be written on the human heart. One result is a clearer revelation of what God demands; another is the enablement of believers to fulfill those demands (see Rom 8:2-4). The interior nature of the new covenant is spoken of in several other passages (Ez 11:19-21; 36:26-27) and made explicit in the prophet Joel of a time when God “will pour out [his] spirit on all flesh” (Jl 2:28-32).<\/p>\n<p>A second contrast is in the way God’s people know him under the two covenants. There is no doubt that Israel under the old covenant “knew” God; God had revealed himself, though at times the nation tended to forget this (Jgs 2:10; Hos 4:1, 6). What the prophets envisioned in the new covenant is a unique personal knowledge of God by each individual member of the covenant community.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the two covenants differ in regard to God’s dealing with human sin. Jeremiah promised that God would forgive the iniquity of his people and blot out their sin. Israel already knew that God delighted in mercy and forgiveness (Ex 34:6-7), but Jeremiah was saying that God would never again remember their sin (Jer 31:34). Under the old covenant there was a reminder of sin year after year (Heb 10:3); under the new covenant no remembrance of sin remains (v 14).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ANewCovenant\">A New Covenant<\/p>\n<p>The expression “new covenant” is found at least six times in the NT (1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6; Heb 8:8, 13; 9:15; 12:24; and probably Lk 22:20, according to some manuscripts). In certain Greek manuscripts the phrase is also found in Matthew 26:28 and Mark 14:24, where “new” seems to have been added by various scribes to “blood of the covenant,” in order to make these accounts conform to parallel accounts of the Lord’s Supper in 1 Corinthians or possibly in Luke.<\/p>\n<p>Even though the term “new” is not found in the accounts in Matthew and Mark in the best Greek manuscripts, and was therefore probably not part of the original text, it is clear from all four accounts that Jesus saw the Lord’s Supper as instituting a different and therefore “new” covenant. The covenant was being sealed by his sacrificial death, that is, by his blood, just as the Mosaic covenant was sealed by the “blood of the covenant” (Ex 24:6-8). The cup of the Lord’s Supper symbolizes the blood of Christ’s sacrifice, sealing the new covenant God has at last made with his people. The new covenant, ratified by Christ’s death, is what the church therefore commemorates each time it celebrates the Lord’s Supper.<\/p>\n<p>In his institution of the Lord’s Supper, Jesus did not elucidate what the “newness” of the covenant entailed. Elsewhere he mentioned a “baptism with the Holy Spirit” (Acts 1:5; 11:16; cf. Mt 3:11; Mk 1:8; Lk 3:16; and Jn 1:33, where this promise is found on the lips of John the Baptist; cf. also 1 Cor 12:13). Yet both OT prophecies refer to the same new covenant that God would establish in the future, as shown in 2 Corinthians 3:6. There the apostle Paul stated that God “has qualified us to be ministers of a new covenant” (<span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Jer 31:31), not “in a written code but in the Spirit” (<span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Jl 2:28-32), for “the written code kills, but the Spirit gives life” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SuperiorityoftheNewCovenant\">Superiority of the New Covenant<\/p>\n<p>In 2 Corinthians 3, Paul was showing that in contrast to the old (Mosaic) covenant (v 14), which was a dispensation of death, carved in letters on stone (v 7), the new covenant instituted by Jesus is one of far greater splendor (vv 8-9), written on the human heart by the Spirit of the living God himself (v 3).<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant concept is treated most exhaustively and systematically in the book of Hebrews. In Hebrews 8:8-12 the quotation of Jeremiah 31:31-34 is the longest OT quotation found in the NT. In Hebrews 12:24 a different Greek word for “new” is used, but the meaning remains the same. The theme of the new covenant dominates the book of Hebrews, which was written to encourage faltering Christians by demonstrating the superiority of the Christian faith over their old Jewish beliefs and practices. In Hebrews the new covenant is seen as better than the old “obsolete” covenant in a number of ways.<\/p>\n<p>1. The new covenant has a better priesthood than the old covenant, since there is no longer any need for a continual change of priests due to death (Heb 7:23). One continual priest now lives forever to make intercession before God on behalf of his people (vv 24-25).<\/p>\n<li>2. The new covenant priest is better than those of the old covenant, since Jesus does not have to offer sacrifices continually for his own sins and then for the sins of his people. He has instead made one complete and perfect offering (7:27; 9:25-28; 10:12).<\/li>\n<li>3. The new covenant has a better sacrifice than the old covenant; what the blood of bulls and goats could not do, since the atonement they brought could at best be only partial (10:2-3), the blood of Christ has done once for all (9:11-14; 10:1-10).<\/li>\n<li>4. The new covenant is built on “better promises” than the old (8:6).<\/li>\n<li>5. Whereas the old covenant was imperfect (8:7) and thus became obsolete (8:13), the new covenant is perfect and eternal (13:20).<\/li>\n<li>6. Whereas the old covenant provided a believer with no direct access to God (9:6-8), the new covenant provides a direct access to God that can purify and perfect the believer’s conscience (cf. 9:14 with 9:9).<\/li>\n<li>7. The new covenant possesses a better “surety,” or guarantee, an oath sworn by God himself (7:20-22).<\/li>\n<li>8. The new covenant assures the presence of the Holy Spirit in the life of each believer. The new covenant community has been touched by the promised Spirit (6:4), who, according to Paul, is both the seal and guarantee of their inheritance (see 2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:13-14).<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant and its accompanying new commandment are both fulfillments of what was implicit in the old. The new covenant is written on the heart of each member of the new covenant community by the Holy Spirit. The power of God’s Spirit within, enabling the believer to carry out the new commandment (Rom 8:2-4; Gal 5:16-25), is a distinctive feature of the new covenant.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Covenant.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COVENANT, The New A gracious provision of God given through Jesus Christ for the redemption of fallen humanity—replacing and fulfilling the old covenant, which was expressed primarily through the Mosaic law. The expression “new covenant” is found principally in the NT. Although the concept of a new covenant is found in several places in the OT (Ez 34:23-31; 37:24-28; Jl 2:12-32), the actual phrase occurs only once (Jer 31:31-34). That passage contrasts the new covenant that the prophet Jeremi...","summary_en":"COVENANT, The New A gracious provision of God given through Jesus Christ for the redemption of fallen humanity—replacing and fulfilling the old covenant, which was expressed primarily through the Mosaic law. The expression “new covenant” is found principally in the NT. Although the concept of a new covenant is found in several places in the OT (Ez 34:23-31; 37:24-28; Jl 2:12-32), the actual phrase occurs only once (Jer 31:31-34). That passage contrasts the new covenant that the prophet Jeremi...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"34":[{"id":20383,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>JOHN THE BAPTIST<\/h3>\n<p>Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29, while Jesus was still ministering.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>• Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>• John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>• Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>• The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BirthInfancyandBoyhood\">Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s Gospel is our only source of information concerning the birth and boyhood of John. The Gospel writer states that John was born in the hill country of Judah (Lk 1:39) of priestly descent, being the son of Zechariah, a priest of the order of Abijah, and Elizabeth, a descendant of Aaron (v 5). Both parents were righteous in the sight of God, following all the commandments closely (v 6). Like the birth of Jesus, only to a much lesser degree, the birth of John the Baptist is described in Luke as extraordinary. The angel Gabriel announced the coming birth to Zechariah in the temple; to the older, barren Elizabeth it came as an answer to prayer (vv 8-13). John’s name is announced to Zechariah by the angel, even as his purpose as forerunner is revealed before birth (vv 13-17). Such a consecration from birth is reminiscent of the call of the OT prophet Jeremiah (cf. Jer 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>There existed some familial relationship between the families of John and Jesus. Elizabeth is described as a relative of Mary (Lk 1:36), which may connote cousin or aunt, or may only mean being from the same tribe.<\/p>\n<p>John’s childhood, as that of Jesus, is left quite vague in the Gospel account. All that is said is that “John grew up and became strong in spirit. Then he lived out in the wilderness until he began his public ministry to Israel” (Lk 1:80, <span>nlt<\/span>). Some scholars have suggested that John might have been adopted as a boy by the Essenes (as was their practice) at Qumran and reared in their wilderness community, adjacent to the Dead Sea and near the Jordan River. There are some similarities between the activities of the Qumran sect, known through the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the later ministry of John the Baptist. Both practiced a type of asceticism and removed themselves from the life of Jerusalem. Both practiced baptism and associated this rite with initiation and repentance. Finally, John and the Qumran group were both eschatologically minded, awaiting God’s final end-time activity in history. Nevertheless, many significant differences exist between John and the Qumran sect.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AppearanceandIdentity\">Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>Mark’s Gospel begins with an account of John the Baptist’s appearance: “John the Baptist . . . lived in the wilderness and was preaching that people should be baptized to show that they had turned from their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Mk 1:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). A rich OT background lies behind John’s association with the wilderness, in this case the wilderness of Judea. It was in the wilderness that God revealed himself to Moses (Ex 3), gave the law, and entered into the covenant with Israel (ch 19). It was also the site of refuge for David (1 Sm 23–26; Ps 63) and Elijah (1 Kgs 19), and in this light became the anticipated site of God’s future deliverance (Is 40:3-5; Ez 47:1-12; Hos 2:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The unusual dress of John the Baptist—“clothing made of camel’s hair, with a leather belt around his waist” (Mk 1:6, <span>niv<\/span>)—may have suggested to his audience an association with Elijah in particular (2 Kgs 1:8) or with the prophets in general (Zec 13:4). His diet, “locusts and wild honey” (Mk 1:6), was Levitically clean, reflecting one who lived off the desert (such food was also eaten at Qumran) and formed part of the broader asceticism practiced by John and his disciples (Mt 9:14; 11:18).<\/p>\n<p>Who did John understand himself to be? In answer to questions by the multitude whether he was the Messiah, Elijah, or the expected prophet (Jn 1:20-23), John only identified himself as “a voice crying in the wilderness, ‘Prepare the way of the Lord’ ” (Is 40:3). The background for the question lies at the end of the OT period. Prophecy, on the one hand, was considered to have ceased (Zec 13:2-6); yet, on the other hand, it was expected to appear again before the coming of the messianic kingdom (see Jl 2:28-29; Mal 3:1-4). Some anticipated this final prophet to be one who was like Moses (Dt 18:15), others a returning Elijah as foretold in Malachi 4:5-6. While John personally refrained from identifying himself with these specific expectations (Jn 1:20-23), it is clear that his dress, lifestyle, and message caused the people to identify him with this end-time prophet (Mt 14:5; Mk 11:32). Jesus also saw John as this final “Elijah-like” prophet (Mt 11:7-15), who from Malachi’s prophecy was to be a forerunner to the coming of the Lord (Mal 3:1-4; 4:5-6).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsProclamation\">John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>John’s proclamation involved three elements: a warning of imminent judgment at the hands of the Coming One, a call for repentance in light of the coming kingdom of heaven, and a demand to express this repentance in concrete ethical terms. Many Jews looked forward confidently to the messianic judgment as a time of blessing for themselves and destruction for the gentile oppressors. John, however, warned that Jewish ancestry was false security in the coming judgment (Lk 3:8); true repentance was the only means of escaping destruction (Mt 3:2). John anticipated this judgment at the hands of the Coming One, who would baptize the nation with “the Holy Spirit and with fire” (Lk 3:16). Fire represented the OT means of destruction in the end time (Mal 4:1) as well as purification (Mal 3:1-4), while the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the end time connoted blessing (Is 32:15; Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28) and purification (Is 4:2-4). The judgment anticipated by John was therefore twofold: destruction for the unrepentant, and blessing for the penitent and righteous (Mt 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>In light of this imminent event John called for repentance on the part of his listeners (Mt 3:2), a true “turning back” or “turning toward” God in obedience that would bring forgiveness of sin. Such a turnabout in an individual’s relation with God should be lived out in one’s everyday dealings: fairness on the part of tax collectors (Lk 3:12-13) and soldiers (v 14), and the general requirement of compassion for the poor (vv 10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsBaptism\">John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels record that John baptized those repentant of their sins at several locations: the Jordan River (Mk 1:5), Bethany beyond the Jordan (Jn 1:28), and Aenon near Salim (Jn 3:23). This practice was an integral part of John’s call for repentance, given in light of the approaching judgment and the appearance of the Coming One. The baptism of the penitent symbolized desire for forgiveness of sin, a renunciation of past life, and a desire to be included in the coming messianic kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>What was the background for John’s practice of baptism? From the OT we know of ceremonial lustrations or washings that guaranteed ritual purity (Lv 14–15; Nm 19). Unlike John’s baptism, these washings were repetitive in nature and referred predominantly to ritual rather than moral cleansing. The prophets, however, urged a moral purification associated with the washing of water (Is 1:16-18; Jer 4:14). More significantly, the prophets anticipated a cleansing by God in the end times preceding the Day of Judgment (Ez 36:25; Zec 13:1; cf. Is 44:3), an eschatological element that John may have assumed was being fulfilled in his water baptism.<\/p>\n<p>Another precedent for John’s practice may have been proselyte baptism, a rite (along with circumcision and the offering of sacrifices) that constituted the conversion of a Gentile to Judaism. Common to both proselyte baptism and John’s baptism were the emphasis on an ethical break with the past, a once-for-all character, and the similarity of immersion. Notable differences were that John’s baptism was for Jews, not Gentile converts, and that it had a marked eschatological character as a preparation for the new age. Unless John, in light of the imminence of the messianic age, consciously treated all Jews as “pagan” in need of a baptism of repentance (cf. Mt 3:7-10), it is doubtful that proselyte baptism formed the primary background for John’s baptismal ministry.<\/p>\n<p>If John’s baptism had a clear association with the forgiveness of sin, the question naturally arises as to why Jesus, the Son of God, sought baptism from John. John himself asks this very question of Jesus (Mt 3:14), to which Jesus responds, “It must be done, because we must do everything that is right” (v 15, <span>nlt<\/span>). First, it is clear that Jesus’ baptism represented an act of obedience on his part to God’s will as he saw it. Second, by submitting to the baptism of John, Jesus was clearly validating the ministry and message of John. The imminent coming of the kingdom and its Messiah, and the need for repentance in anticipation of this event that John proclaimed, were affirmed by Jesus through baptism. Third, by being baptized, Jesus condemned the self-righteous for their lack of repentance and took a stand with the penitent publicans and sinners awaiting the kingdom of God (Lk 7:29-30). Fourth, Jesus stepped forward for baptism not as an individual in need of forgiveness but as one who represented the people of God. His baptism, therefore, demonstrated solidarity with the people in their need of deliverance, even as he is judged in their place on the cross. Finally, the voice from heaven (Mk 1:11) and the descent of the Spirit (Lk 3:21-22) signify the inauguration of Jesus’ own ministry through his baptism by John.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsViewofJesus\">John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>Throughout his ministry John pointed beyond himself to one “who is far greater than I am—so much greater that I am not even worthy to be his slave” (Mk 1:7, <span>nlt<\/span>). His self-understanding apparently sprang from the application of Isaiah 40:3 to himself, that he was the preparer or forerunner for God’s coming activity through the Messiah (Lk 3:4-6). When asked by curious spectators, John firmly denied that he was the Messiah, and according to the Gospel accounts, subordinated himself to the Coming One (Mk 1:7-8; Jn 1:26-28; 3:28-31). The coming of Jesus to baptism seems to represent the first time John identified these expectations with Jesus himself (Jn 1:35-36). His recognition of Jesus as the Messiah prior to baptism (Mt 3:14) was confirmed by the descent of the Holy Spirit as a dove and the voice from heaven quoting a phrase from an OT messianic psalm (Mk 1:11a, from Ps 2:7), together with a phrase from a Suffering Servant song of Isaiah (Mk 1:11b, from Is 42:1). In the fourth Gospel, John the Baptist goes even further in acknowledging Jesus to be the “Lamb of God” (Jn 1:29), in anticipation of Jesus’ sacrificial role on the cross. And John recognized him as “God’s Chosen One” (v 34, <span>neb<\/span>—another term for the Messiah; Ps 2:7, see Mk 1:11).<\/p>\n<p>In light of John’s strong affirmation, it is at first difficult to understand his questioning of Jesus while imprisoned: “Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?” (Mt 11:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). Some have suggested that John was merely asking for the sake of his disciples, or that the question reflected John’s despondency with being imprisoned. It is more likely, however, that the question represents John’s own confusion with the activity expected of the Messiah. John had proclaimed a Coming One who would bring a baptism of fire and judgment upon the wicked (Lk 3:16). It may have been difficult for him to understand Jesus’ different emphases on forgiveness and acceptance of sinners (Mt 9:9-13) and his healing of the sick (Mt 8–9). When John’s disciples brought their master’s question to Jesus, asking whether or not he was the Messiah, Jesus responded by quoting Isaiah 35:5-6 (see also Is 61:1). This text proclaims the activities of healing and proclaiming salvation to the poor to be fulfillments of the Messiah’s role, even though they may not have been what John or countless other Jews expected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusViewofJohn\">Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>That Jesus highly regarded John the Baptist is indicated by his baptism by John. It is also explicitly stated on several occasions. Jesus called him the greatest man to have ever lived (Lk 7:28). (Of course, he was not as great as Jesus, the God-man.) Jesus also said that John was a burning and shining lamp (Jn 5:33-35) and that he practiced a baptism divinely ordained (Lk 20:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>John’s uniqueness, however, lies in the fact that he stood at the turning of the ages. He was the last of the old era, the period of the law and the prophets (Lk 16:16), which was to precede the coming of the messianic age (the kingdom of God). John was the last of the prophets, the greatest of them, the Elijah figure who would prepare the way for the judgment of God (Mt 11:13-15; Lk 1:17). Because John belonged to the era of the law and the prophets, however, he was not as great as the “least” already in the kingdom of God (Mt 11:11)—that is, those who belonged to the era of the kingdom’s appearance in Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ArrestImprisonmentandMartyrdom\">Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>To understand why John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas, one has to grasp the messianic excitement caused by John’s appearance and message (Lk 3:15-18). Herod and other secular rulers were obviously suspicious of anyone who might stir up the crowds with predictions of a coming messianic ruler. Other messianic movements had arisen before John, which resulted in outbreaks of violence against the Roman-Herodian rulership. Moreover, Herod Antipas was under heavy criticism for his marriage with Herodias, the ex-wife of his brother Philip. His first marriage, with the daughter of Aretus II, constituted a political alliance between the Herodian family and the Nabatean kingdom of Perea. His new relationship with Herodias was perceived as a breach of the political alliance and led to friction between the two families. John’s denunciation of Herod’s new marriage (Mt 14:3-12) could thus have been interpreted by Herod as a subversive rousing of sentiment against his authority. The Jewish historian Josephus states that Herod did, in fact, arrest John because he feared John’s influence over the crowds. According to Josephus, John was imprisoned at the fortress Machaerus on the eastern side of the Dead Sea. That he was not killed immediately was due to Herod’s personal fear of the righteous John (Mk 6:2) and of the people’s reaction (Mt 14:5). On a point about which Josephus is silent, the Gospels record that it was Herodias’s feelings against John (Mk 6:17) and her plot, through the dancing of her daughter, which brought about the beheading of John (vv 21-29). John was beheaded at Herodias’s request in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29 or 30.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheDisciplesofJohn\">The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p>While it is clear that a band of disciples formed around John in his lifetime (Jn 1:35), to suggest that he intended to begin a continuing movement is contradicted by his message on the imminent Day of Judgment. Apparently, John’s disciples consisted of a small group of those who had been baptized by him and were awaiting the coming Messiah. Some transferred their loyalty to Jesus after John had identified Jesus as the Coming One (Jn 1:37). Others, however, apparently stayed on with their teacher, communicating with the imprisoned John concerning the activities of Jesus (Lk 7:18-23) and, after his death, taking the body for burial (Mk 6:29).<\/p>\n<p>We know little about the activities and practices of the band of disciples clustered around John. We do know, however, that fasting was one practice specifically associated with the group, and one that marked them as similar to the Pharisees (Mt 9:14). In this practice they no doubt followed the example of John himself (Lk 7:33). Prayer and fasting were often linked in late Judaism. The disciples of John were also known for the prayers taught by their master (11:1). Seeing this practice, the disciples of Jesus asked the Lord to teach them to pray, to which Jesus responded with the Lord’s Prayer (vv 2-4).<\/p>\n<p>After his death it is likely that other disciples of John joined the followers of Jesus (see Lk 7:29-30). Not all did so, however, as disciples of John were encountered by Paul and other Christians approximately 25 years later in Ephesus (Acts 18:24–29:7). Upon hearing witness to Jesus, these followers of John proclaimed Jesus as Messiah. When Paul baptized them in the name of Jesus they received the Holy Spirit (19:4-7). Even so, it is apparent from later documents that various groups continued to honor John, even considering him the Messiah, centuries after the NT period.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOHN THE BAPTIST<\/h3>\n<p>Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29, while Jesus was still ministering.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>• Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>• John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>• Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>• The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BirthInfancyandBoyhood\">Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s Gospel is our only source of information concerning the birth and boyhood of John. The Gospel writer states that John was born in the hill country of Judah (Lk 1:39) of priestly descent, being the son of Zechariah, a priest of the order of Abijah, and Elizabeth, a descendant of Aaron (v 5). Both parents were righteous in the sight of God, following all the commandments closely (v 6). Like the birth of Jesus, only to a much lesser degree, the birth of John the Baptist is described in Luke as extraordinary. The angel Gabriel announced the coming birth to Zechariah in the temple; to the older, barren Elizabeth it came as an answer to prayer (vv 8-13). John’s name is announced to Zechariah by the angel, even as his purpose as forerunner is revealed before birth (vv 13-17). Such a consecration from birth is reminiscent of the call of the OT prophet Jeremiah (cf. Jer 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>There existed some familial relationship between the families of John and Jesus. Elizabeth is described as a relative of Mary (Lk 1:36), which may connote cousin or aunt, or may only mean being from the same tribe.<\/p>\n<p>John’s childhood, as that of Jesus, is left quite vague in the Gospel account. All that is said is that “John grew up and became strong in spirit. Then he lived out in the wilderness until he began his public ministry to Israel” (Lk 1:80, <span>nlt<\/span>). Some scholars have suggested that John might have been adopted as a boy by the Essenes (as was their practice) at Qumran and reared in their wilderness community, adjacent to the Dead Sea and near the Jordan River. There are some similarities between the activities of the Qumran sect, known through the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the later ministry of John the Baptist. Both practiced a type of asceticism and removed themselves from the life of Jerusalem. Both practiced baptism and associated this rite with initiation and repentance. Finally, John and the Qumran group were both eschatologically minded, awaiting God’s final end-time activity in history. Nevertheless, many significant differences exist between John and the Qumran sect.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AppearanceandIdentity\">Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>Mark’s Gospel begins with an account of John the Baptist’s appearance: “John the Baptist . . . lived in the wilderness and was preaching that people should be baptized to show that they had turned from their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Mk 1:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). A rich OT background lies behind John’s association with the wilderness, in this case the wilderness of Judea. It was in the wilderness that God revealed himself to Moses (Ex 3), gave the law, and entered into the covenant with Israel (ch 19). It was also the site of refuge for David (1 Sm 23–26; Ps 63) and Elijah (1 Kgs 19), and in this light became the anticipated site of God’s future deliverance (Is 40:3-5; Ez 47:1-12; Hos 2:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The unusual dress of John the Baptist—“clothing made of camel’s hair, with a leather belt around his waist” (Mk 1:6, <span>niv<\/span>)—may have suggested to his audience an association with Elijah in particular (2 Kgs 1:8) or with the prophets in general (Zec 13:4). His diet, “locusts and wild honey” (Mk 1:6), was Levitically clean, reflecting one who lived off the desert (such food was also eaten at Qumran) and formed part of the broader asceticism practiced by John and his disciples (Mt 9:14; 11:18).<\/p>\n<p>Who did John understand himself to be? In answer to questions by the multitude whether he was the Messiah, Elijah, or the expected prophet (Jn 1:20-23), John only identified himself as “a voice crying in the wilderness, ‘Prepare the way of the Lord’ ” (Is 40:3). The background for the question lies at the end of the OT period. Prophecy, on the one hand, was considered to have ceased (Zec 13:2-6); yet, on the other hand, it was expected to appear again before the coming of the messianic kingdom (see Jl 2:28-29; Mal 3:1-4). Some anticipated this final prophet to be one who was like Moses (Dt 18:15), others a returning Elijah as foretold in Malachi 4:5-6. While John personally refrained from identifying himself with these specific expectations (Jn 1:20-23), it is clear that his dress, lifestyle, and message caused the people to identify him with this end-time prophet (Mt 14:5; Mk 11:32). Jesus also saw John as this final “Elijah-like” prophet (Mt 11:7-15), who from Malachi’s prophecy was to be a forerunner to the coming of the Lord (Mal 3:1-4; 4:5-6).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsProclamation\">John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>John’s proclamation involved three elements: a warning of imminent judgment at the hands of the Coming One, a call for repentance in light of the coming kingdom of heaven, and a demand to express this repentance in concrete ethical terms. Many Jews looked forward confidently to the messianic judgment as a time of blessing for themselves and destruction for the gentile oppressors. John, however, warned that Jewish ancestry was false security in the coming judgment (Lk 3:8); true repentance was the only means of escaping destruction (Mt 3:2). John anticipated this judgment at the hands of the Coming One, who would baptize the nation with “the Holy Spirit and with fire” (Lk 3:16). Fire represented the OT means of destruction in the end time (Mal 4:1) as well as purification (Mal 3:1-4), while the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the end time connoted blessing (Is 32:15; Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28) and purification (Is 4:2-4). The judgment anticipated by John was therefore twofold: destruction for the unrepentant, and blessing for the penitent and righteous (Mt 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>In light of this imminent event John called for repentance on the part of his listeners (Mt 3:2), a true “turning back” or “turning toward” God in obedience that would bring forgiveness of sin. Such a turnabout in an individual’s relation with God should be lived out in one’s everyday dealings: fairness on the part of tax collectors (Lk 3:12-13) and soldiers (v 14), and the general requirement of compassion for the poor (vv 10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsBaptism\">John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels record that John baptized those repentant of their sins at several locations: the Jordan River (Mk 1:5), Bethany beyond the Jordan (Jn 1:28), and Aenon near Salim (Jn 3:23). This practice was an integral part of John’s call for repentance, given in light of the approaching judgment and the appearance of the Coming One. The baptism of the penitent symbolized desire for forgiveness of sin, a renunciation of past life, and a desire to be included in the coming messianic kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>What was the background for John’s practice of baptism? From the OT we know of ceremonial lustrations or washings that guaranteed ritual purity (Lv 14–15; Nm 19). Unlike John’s baptism, these washings were repetitive in nature and referred predominantly to ritual rather than moral cleansing. The prophets, however, urged a moral purification associated with the washing of water (Is 1:16-18; Jer 4:14). More significantly, the prophets anticipated a cleansing by God in the end times preceding the Day of Judgment (Ez 36:25; Zec 13:1; cf. Is 44:3), an eschatological element that John may have assumed was being fulfilled in his water baptism.<\/p>\n<p>Another precedent for John’s practice may have been proselyte baptism, a rite (along with circumcision and the offering of sacrifices) that constituted the conversion of a Gentile to Judaism. Common to both proselyte baptism and John’s baptism were the emphasis on an ethical break with the past, a once-for-all character, and the similarity of immersion. Notable differences were that John’s baptism was for Jews, not Gentile converts, and that it had a marked eschatological character as a preparation for the new age. Unless John, in light of the imminence of the messianic age, consciously treated all Jews as “pagan” in need of a baptism of repentance (cf. Mt 3:7-10), it is doubtful that proselyte baptism formed the primary background for John’s baptismal ministry.<\/p>\n<p>If John’s baptism had a clear association with the forgiveness of sin, the question naturally arises as to why Jesus, the Son of God, sought baptism from John. John himself asks this very question of Jesus (Mt 3:14), to which Jesus responds, “It must be done, because we must do everything that is right” (v 15, <span>nlt<\/span>). First, it is clear that Jesus’ baptism represented an act of obedience on his part to God’s will as he saw it. Second, by submitting to the baptism of John, Jesus was clearly validating the ministry and message of John. The imminent coming of the kingdom and its Messiah, and the need for repentance in anticipation of this event that John proclaimed, were affirmed by Jesus through baptism. Third, by being baptized, Jesus condemned the self-righteous for their lack of repentance and took a stand with the penitent publicans and sinners awaiting the kingdom of God (Lk 7:29-30). Fourth, Jesus stepped forward for baptism not as an individual in need of forgiveness but as one who represented the people of God. His baptism, therefore, demonstrated solidarity with the people in their need of deliverance, even as he is judged in their place on the cross. Finally, the voice from heaven (Mk 1:11) and the descent of the Spirit (Lk 3:21-22) signify the inauguration of Jesus’ own ministry through his baptism by John.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsViewofJesus\">John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>Throughout his ministry John pointed beyond himself to one “who is far greater than I am—so much greater that I am not even worthy to be his slave” (Mk 1:7, <span>nlt<\/span>). His self-understanding apparently sprang from the application of Isaiah 40:3 to himself, that he was the preparer or forerunner for God’s coming activity through the Messiah (Lk 3:4-6). When asked by curious spectators, John firmly denied that he was the Messiah, and according to the Gospel accounts, subordinated himself to the Coming One (Mk 1:7-8; Jn 1:26-28; 3:28-31). The coming of Jesus to baptism seems to represent the first time John identified these expectations with Jesus himself (Jn 1:35-36). His recognition of Jesus as the Messiah prior to baptism (Mt 3:14) was confirmed by the descent of the Holy Spirit as a dove and the voice from heaven quoting a phrase from an OT messianic psalm (Mk 1:11a, from Ps 2:7), together with a phrase from a Suffering Servant song of Isaiah (Mk 1:11b, from Is 42:1). In the fourth Gospel, John the Baptist goes even further in acknowledging Jesus to be the “Lamb of God” (Jn 1:29), in anticipation of Jesus’ sacrificial role on the cross. And John recognized him as “God’s Chosen One” (v 34, <span>neb<\/span>—another term for the Messiah; Ps 2:7, see Mk 1:11).<\/p>\n<p>In light of John’s strong affirmation, it is at first difficult to understand his questioning of Jesus while imprisoned: “Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?” (Mt 11:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). Some have suggested that John was merely asking for the sake of his disciples, or that the question reflected John’s despondency with being imprisoned. It is more likely, however, that the question represents John’s own confusion with the activity expected of the Messiah. John had proclaimed a Coming One who would bring a baptism of fire and judgment upon the wicked (Lk 3:16). It may have been difficult for him to understand Jesus’ different emphases on forgiveness and acceptance of sinners (Mt 9:9-13) and his healing of the sick (Mt 8–9). When John’s disciples brought their master’s question to Jesus, asking whether or not he was the Messiah, Jesus responded by quoting Isaiah 35:5-6 (see also Is 61:1). This text proclaims the activities of healing and proclaiming salvation to the poor to be fulfillments of the Messiah’s role, even though they may not have been what John or countless other Jews expected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusViewofJohn\">Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>That Jesus highly regarded John the Baptist is indicated by his baptism by John. It is also explicitly stated on several occasions. Jesus called him the greatest man to have ever lived (Lk 7:28). (Of course, he was not as great as Jesus, the God-man.) Jesus also said that John was a burning and shining lamp (Jn 5:33-35) and that he practiced a baptism divinely ordained (Lk 20:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>John’s uniqueness, however, lies in the fact that he stood at the turning of the ages. He was the last of the old era, the period of the law and the prophets (Lk 16:16), which was to precede the coming of the messianic age (the kingdom of God). John was the last of the prophets, the greatest of them, the Elijah figure who would prepare the way for the judgment of God (Mt 11:13-15; Lk 1:17). Because John belonged to the era of the law and the prophets, however, he was not as great as the “least” already in the kingdom of God (Mt 11:11)—that is, those who belonged to the era of the kingdom’s appearance in Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ArrestImprisonmentandMartyrdom\">Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>To understand why John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas, one has to grasp the messianic excitement caused by John’s appearance and message (Lk 3:15-18). Herod and other secular rulers were obviously suspicious of anyone who might stir up the crowds with predictions of a coming messianic ruler. Other messianic movements had arisen before John, which resulted in outbreaks of violence against the Roman-Herodian rulership. Moreover, Herod Antipas was under heavy criticism for his marriage with Herodias, the ex-wife of his brother Philip. His first marriage, with the daughter of Aretus II, constituted a political alliance between the Herodian family and the Nabatean kingdom of Perea. His new relationship with Herodias was perceived as a breach of the political alliance and led to friction between the two families. John’s denunciation of Herod’s new marriage (Mt 14:3-12) could thus have been interpreted by Herod as a subversive rousing of sentiment against his authority. The Jewish historian Josephus states that Herod did, in fact, arrest John because he feared John’s influence over the crowds. According to Josephus, John was imprisoned at the fortress Machaerus on the eastern side of the Dead Sea. That he was not killed immediately was due to Herod’s personal fear of the righteous John (Mk 6:2) and of the people’s reaction (Mt 14:5). On a point about which Josephus is silent, the Gospels record that it was Herodias’s feelings against John (Mk 6:17) and her plot, through the dancing of her daughter, which brought about the beheading of John (vv 21-29). John was beheaded at Herodias’s request in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29 or 30.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheDisciplesofJohn\">The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p>While it is clear that a band of disciples formed around John in his lifetime (Jn 1:35), to suggest that he intended to begin a continuing movement is contradicted by his message on the imminent Day of Judgment. Apparently, John’s disciples consisted of a small group of those who had been baptized by him and were awaiting the coming Messiah. Some transferred their loyalty to Jesus after John had identified Jesus as the Coming One (Jn 1:37). Others, however, apparently stayed on with their teacher, communicating with the imprisoned John concerning the activities of Jesus (Lk 7:18-23) and, after his death, taking the body for burial (Mk 6:29).<\/p>\n<p>We know little about the activities and practices of the band of disciples clustered around John. We do know, however, that fasting was one practice specifically associated with the group, and one that marked them as similar to the Pharisees (Mt 9:14). In this practice they no doubt followed the example of John himself (Lk 7:33). Prayer and fasting were often linked in late Judaism. The disciples of John were also known for the prayers taught by their master (11:1). Seeing this practice, the disciples of Jesus asked the Lord to teach them to pray, to which Jesus responded with the Lord’s Prayer (vv 2-4).<\/p>\n<p>After his death it is likely that other disciples of John joined the followers of Jesus (see Lk 7:29-30). Not all did so, however, as disciples of John were encountered by Paul and other Christians approximately 25 years later in Ephesus (Acts 18:24–29:7). Upon hearing witness to Jesus, these followers of John proclaimed Jesus as Messiah. When Paul baptized them in the name of Jesus they received the Holy Spirit (19:4-7). Even so, it is apparent from later documents that various groups continued to honor John, even considering him the Messiah, centuries after the NT period.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOHN THE BAPTIST Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately AD 29, while Jesus was still ministering. Preview • Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood • Appearance and Identity • John’s Proclamation • ...","summary_en":"JOHN THE BAPTIST Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately AD 29, while Jesus was still ministering. Preview • Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood • Appearance and Identity • John’s Proclamation • ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56330,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:34","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:34","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:34<\/strong> <em>the Chosen One of God:<\/em> See Isa 42:1.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:34<\/strong> <em>the Chosen One of God:<\/em> See Isa 42:1.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:34 the Chosen One of God: See Isa 42:1.","summary_en":"1:34 the Chosen One of God: See Isa 42:1.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83956,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:34","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:34","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:34<\/strong> <em>the Chosen One of God:<\/em> See Isa 42:1.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:34<\/strong> <em>the Chosen One of God:<\/em> See Isa 42:1.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:34 the Chosen One of God: See Isa 42:1.","summary_en":"1:34 the Chosen One of God: See Isa 42:1.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111582,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:34","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:34","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:34<\/strong> <em>the Chosen One of God:<\/em> See Isa 42:1.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:34<\/strong> <em>the Chosen One of God:<\/em> See Isa 42:1.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:34 the Chosen One of God: See Isa 42:1.","summary_en":"1:34 the Chosen One of God: See Isa 42:1.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139208,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:34","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:34","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:34<\/strong> <em>the Chosen One of God:<\/em> See Isa 42:1.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:34<\/strong> <em>the Chosen One of God:<\/em> See Isa 42:1.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:34 the Chosen One of God: See Isa 42:1.","summary_en":"1:34 the Chosen One of God: See Isa 42:1.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65932,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","title_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","content_ro":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","summary_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93558,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","title_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","content_ro":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","summary_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121184,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","title_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","content_ro":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","summary_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148810,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","title_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","content_ro":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","summary_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"35":[{"id":42104,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":42405,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","summary_en":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":42494,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John, Son of Zebedee","title_en":"John, Son of Zebedee","content_ro":"<h3>John, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was younger. James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19). They fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:8-10). They were among the first whom Jesus called as disciples, and they left everything to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11; cp. John 1:35-40). Jesus named them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they were loud or short-tempered (see Luke 9:54). At one point, the two brothers evoked the indignation of the other disciples when they asked for special positions of privilege in the coming kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>John is understood to be the unnamed “disciple Jesus loved” and “another disciple” mentioned in the Gospel of John (John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:20-24). He may have been the unnamed disciple of John the Baptist, who, together with Andrew, became an early follower of Jesus (John 1:35-40).<\/p>\n<p class=\"profile-body\" ts=\"profile-body 10\">John’s name occurs three times in Acts; each time he was working with Peter (Acts 3:1-11; 4:1-23; 8:14-25). Paul referred to him as one of the “pillars” of the church in Jerusalem (Gal 2:9).<\/p>\n<p>The most widespread tradition about John’s later life is that he moved to Ephesus, where he eventually became the bishop of Asia Minor, lived to an old age, and died peacefully in the company of friends. His Gospel provides a profound portrait of Jesus, and his letters provide a moving depiction of the Christian life (1–3 John).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2, 38; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 49, 54; John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:2, 7, 20-24; Acts 1:13; 3:1-11; 4:1-22; 5:17-42; 8:14-25; Gal 2:9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was younger. James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19). They fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:8-10). They were among the first whom Jesus called as disciples, and they left everything to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11; cp. John 1:35-40). Jesus named them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they were loud or short-tempered (see Luke 9:54). At one point, the two brothers evoked the indignation of the other disciples when they asked for special positions of privilege in the coming kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>John is understood to be the unnamed “disciple Jesus loved” and “another disciple” mentioned in the Gospel of John (John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:20-24). He may have been the unnamed disciple of John the Baptist, who, together with Andrew, became an early follower of Jesus (John 1:35-40).<\/p>\n<p class=\"profile-body\" ts=\"profile-body 10\">John’s name occurs three times in Acts; each time he was working with Peter (Acts 3:1-11; 4:1-23; 8:14-25). Paul referred to him as one of the “pillars” of the church in Jerusalem (Gal 2:9).<\/p>\n<p>The most widespread tradition about John’s later life is that he moved to Ephesus, where he eventually became the bishop of Asia Minor, lived to an old age, and died peacefully in the company of friends. His Gospel provides a profound portrait of Jesus, and his letters provide a moving depiction of the Christian life (1–3 John).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2, 38; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 49, 54; John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:2, 7, 20-24; Acts 1:13; 3:1-11; 4:1-22; 5:17-42; 8:14-25; Gal 2:9<\/p>","summary_ro":"John, Son of Zebedee John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation. John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was...","summary_en":"John, Son of Zebedee John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation. John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69730,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":70031,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","summary_en":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":70120,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John, Son of Zebedee","title_en":"John, Son of Zebedee","content_ro":"<h3>John, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was younger. James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19). They fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:8-10). They were among the first whom Jesus called as disciples, and they left everything to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11; cp. John 1:35-40). Jesus named them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they were loud or short-tempered (see Luke 9:54). At one point, the two brothers evoked the indignation of the other disciples when they asked for special positions of privilege in the coming kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>John is understood to be the unnamed “disciple Jesus loved” and “another disciple” mentioned in the Gospel of John (John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:20-24). He may have been the unnamed disciple of John the Baptist, who, together with Andrew, became an early follower of Jesus (John 1:35-40).<\/p>\n<p class=\"profile-body\" ts=\"profile-body 10\">John’s name occurs three times in Acts; each time he was working with Peter (Acts 3:1-11; 4:1-23; 8:14-25). Paul referred to him as one of the “pillars” of the church in Jerusalem (Gal 2:9).<\/p>\n<p>The most widespread tradition about John’s later life is that he moved to Ephesus, where he eventually became the bishop of Asia Minor, lived to an old age, and died peacefully in the company of friends. His Gospel provides a profound portrait of Jesus, and his letters provide a moving depiction of the Christian life (1–3 John).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2, 38; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 49, 54; John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:2, 7, 20-24; Acts 1:13; 3:1-11; 4:1-22; 5:17-42; 8:14-25; Gal 2:9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was younger. James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19). They fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:8-10). They were among the first whom Jesus called as disciples, and they left everything to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11; cp. John 1:35-40). Jesus named them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they were loud or short-tempered (see Luke 9:54). At one point, the two brothers evoked the indignation of the other disciples when they asked for special positions of privilege in the coming kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>John is understood to be the unnamed “disciple Jesus loved” and “another disciple” mentioned in the Gospel of John (John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:20-24). He may have been the unnamed disciple of John the Baptist, who, together with Andrew, became an early follower of Jesus (John 1:35-40).<\/p>\n<p class=\"profile-body\" ts=\"profile-body 10\">John’s name occurs three times in Acts; each time he was working with Peter (Acts 3:1-11; 4:1-23; 8:14-25). Paul referred to him as one of the “pillars” of the church in Jerusalem (Gal 2:9).<\/p>\n<p>The most widespread tradition about John’s later life is that he moved to Ephesus, where he eventually became the bishop of Asia Minor, lived to an old age, and died peacefully in the company of friends. His Gospel provides a profound portrait of Jesus, and his letters provide a moving depiction of the Christian life (1–3 John).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2, 38; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 49, 54; John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:2, 7, 20-24; Acts 1:13; 3:1-11; 4:1-22; 5:17-42; 8:14-25; Gal 2:9<\/p>","summary_ro":"John, Son of Zebedee John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation. John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was...","summary_en":"John, Son of Zebedee John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation. John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97356,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97657,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","summary_en":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97746,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John, Son of Zebedee","title_en":"John, Son of Zebedee","content_ro":"<h3>John, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was younger. James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19). They fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:8-10). They were among the first whom Jesus called as disciples, and they left everything to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11; cp. John 1:35-40). Jesus named them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they were loud or short-tempered (see Luke 9:54). At one point, the two brothers evoked the indignation of the other disciples when they asked for special positions of privilege in the coming kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>John is understood to be the unnamed “disciple Jesus loved” and “another disciple” mentioned in the Gospel of John (John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:20-24). He may have been the unnamed disciple of John the Baptist, who, together with Andrew, became an early follower of Jesus (John 1:35-40).<\/p>\n<p class=\"profile-body\" ts=\"profile-body 10\">John’s name occurs three times in Acts; each time he was working with Peter (Acts 3:1-11; 4:1-23; 8:14-25). Paul referred to him as one of the “pillars” of the church in Jerusalem (Gal 2:9).<\/p>\n<p>The most widespread tradition about John’s later life is that he moved to Ephesus, where he eventually became the bishop of Asia Minor, lived to an old age, and died peacefully in the company of friends. His Gospel provides a profound portrait of Jesus, and his letters provide a moving depiction of the Christian life (1–3 John).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2, 38; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 49, 54; John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:2, 7, 20-24; Acts 1:13; 3:1-11; 4:1-22; 5:17-42; 8:14-25; Gal 2:9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was younger. James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19). They fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:8-10). They were among the first whom Jesus called as disciples, and they left everything to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11; cp. John 1:35-40). Jesus named them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they were loud or short-tempered (see Luke 9:54). At one point, the two brothers evoked the indignation of the other disciples when they asked for special positions of privilege in the coming kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>John is understood to be the unnamed “disciple Jesus loved” and “another disciple” mentioned in the Gospel of John (John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:20-24). He may have been the unnamed disciple of John the Baptist, who, together with Andrew, became an early follower of Jesus (John 1:35-40).<\/p>\n<p class=\"profile-body\" ts=\"profile-body 10\">John’s name occurs three times in Acts; each time he was working with Peter (Acts 3:1-11; 4:1-23; 8:14-25). Paul referred to him as one of the “pillars” of the church in Jerusalem (Gal 2:9).<\/p>\n<p>The most widespread tradition about John’s later life is that he moved to Ephesus, where he eventually became the bishop of Asia Minor, lived to an old age, and died peacefully in the company of friends. His Gospel provides a profound portrait of Jesus, and his letters provide a moving depiction of the Christian life (1–3 John).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2, 38; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 49, 54; John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:2, 7, 20-24; Acts 1:13; 3:1-11; 4:1-22; 5:17-42; 8:14-25; Gal 2:9<\/p>","summary_ro":"John, Son of Zebedee John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation. John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was...","summary_en":"John, Son of Zebedee John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation. John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":124982,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125283,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","summary_en":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125372,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John, Son of Zebedee","title_en":"John, Son of Zebedee","content_ro":"<h3>John, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was younger. James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19). They fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:8-10). They were among the first whom Jesus called as disciples, and they left everything to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11; cp. John 1:35-40). Jesus named them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they were loud or short-tempered (see Luke 9:54). At one point, the two brothers evoked the indignation of the other disciples when they asked for special positions of privilege in the coming kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>John is understood to be the unnamed “disciple Jesus loved” and “another disciple” mentioned in the Gospel of John (John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:20-24). He may have been the unnamed disciple of John the Baptist, who, together with Andrew, became an early follower of Jesus (John 1:35-40).<\/p>\n<p class=\"profile-body\" ts=\"profile-body 10\">John’s name occurs three times in Acts; each time he was working with Peter (Acts 3:1-11; 4:1-23; 8:14-25). Paul referred to him as one of the “pillars” of the church in Jerusalem (Gal 2:9).<\/p>\n<p>The most widespread tradition about John’s later life is that he moved to Ephesus, where he eventually became the bishop of Asia Minor, lived to an old age, and died peacefully in the company of friends. His Gospel provides a profound portrait of Jesus, and his letters provide a moving depiction of the Christian life (1–3 John).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2, 38; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 49, 54; John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:2, 7, 20-24; Acts 1:13; 3:1-11; 4:1-22; 5:17-42; 8:14-25; Gal 2:9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was younger. James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19). They fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:8-10). They were among the first whom Jesus called as disciples, and they left everything to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11; cp. John 1:35-40). Jesus named them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they were loud or short-tempered (see Luke 9:54). At one point, the two brothers evoked the indignation of the other disciples when they asked for special positions of privilege in the coming kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>John is understood to be the unnamed “disciple Jesus loved” and “another disciple” mentioned in the Gospel of John (John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:20-24). He may have been the unnamed disciple of John the Baptist, who, together with Andrew, became an early follower of Jesus (John 1:35-40).<\/p>\n<p class=\"profile-body\" ts=\"profile-body 10\">John’s name occurs three times in Acts; each time he was working with Peter (Acts 3:1-11; 4:1-23; 8:14-25). Paul referred to him as one of the “pillars” of the church in Jerusalem (Gal 2:9).<\/p>\n<p>The most widespread tradition about John’s later life is that he moved to Ephesus, where he eventually became the bishop of Asia Minor, lived to an old age, and died peacefully in the company of friends. His Gospel provides a profound portrait of Jesus, and his letters provide a moving depiction of the Christian life (1–3 John).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2, 38; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 49, 54; John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:2, 7, 20-24; Acts 1:13; 3:1-11; 4:1-22; 5:17-42; 8:14-25; Gal 2:9<\/p>","summary_ro":"John, Son of Zebedee John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation. John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was...","summary_en":"John, Son of Zebedee John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation. John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":1581,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Andrew, the Apostle","title_en":"Andrew, the Apostle","content_ro":"<h3>ANDREW, T<span>he<\/span> A<span>postle<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>One of Christ’s 12 apostles. Andrew first appears in the NT as a disciple of John the Baptist (Jn 1:35, 40). After hearing John say, “Look, there is the Lamb of God!” (Jn 1:36), referring to Jesus, Andrew and another unnamed disciple followed Jesus and stayed with him for a day (Jn 1:36-39). Andrew then told his brother, Simon Peter, that he had found the Messiah and brought Peter to Jesus (Jn 1:40-42). From then on Andrew faded into the background, and his brother came into prominence. Whenever the relationship of the two is mentioned, Andrew is always described as the brother of Simon Peter and never the other way around (Mt 4:18; Mk 1:16; Jn 1:40; 6:8), although Andrew is also mentioned without reference to his relationship to Peter (Mk 1:29; 3:18; 13:3; Jn 12:22). Andrew’s father was John (Mt 16:17; Jn 1:42; 21:15-17), and his hometown was Bethsaida (Jn 1:44), a village on the north shore of the Sea of Galilee.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John mentions disciples being with Jesus (2:2; 4:2), and it is likely that Andrew was one of that early group. Evidently, however, he returned to his activity as a fisherman on the Sea of Galilee, where he shared a house with Peter and his family in Capernaum (Mt 4:18-20; Mk 1:16-18, 29-33). While they were fishing, Andrew and Peter received a definite call to follow Jesus and become those who fish for people. From among the disciples of Jesus a group of 12 were later specially chosen as apostles. Andrew is always listed among the first four named, along with Peter and two other brothers, John and James (Mt 10:2-4; Lk 6:13-16; Acts 1:13).<\/p>\n<p>Andrew is named in only three other contexts in the Gospels. At the feeding of the 5,000 he called attention to the boy who had five barley loaves and two fish (Jn 6:8-9). When certain Greeks came to Philip, asking to see Jesus, Philip told Andrew and then the two of them told Jesus (Jn 12:20-22). Finally, Andrew is listed among those who were questioning Jesus privately on the Mt of Olives (Mk 13:3-4). The last NT mention of Andrew is in the list of apostles waiting in the upper room in Jerusalem for the promised outpouring of the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:12-14).<\/p>\n<p>Various documents associated with Andrew, such as the Acts of Andrew mentioned by the early church historian Eusebius, are of doubtful value. Some traditions indicate that Andrew ministered in Scythia. According to the Muratorian Canon, Andrew received a revelation at night that the apostle John should write the fourth Gospel. Tradition is rather uniform that Andrew died at Patrae in Achaia. A story developed that he was martyred on an X-shaped cross (a “decussate” or “saltire” cross), which has become known as St Andrew’s Cross. Another tradition is that an arm of the dead Andrew was taken into Scotland as a relic by Regulus, and thus Andrew became known as a patron saint of Scotland. On the calendar of saints of the Roman and Greek churches, Andrew’s date is set as November 30. <em>See<\/em> Apocrypha (Specific Titles of Apocryphal Writings): Andrew, Acts of; Andrew, Story of; Andrew and Matthias, Acts of; Andrew and Paul, Acts of.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Apostle, Apostleship.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ANDREW, T<span>he<\/span> A<span>postle<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>One of Christ’s 12 apostles. Andrew first appears in the NT as a disciple of John the Baptist (Jn 1:35, 40). After hearing John say, “Look, there is the Lamb of God!” (Jn 1:36), referring to Jesus, Andrew and another unnamed disciple followed Jesus and stayed with him for a day (Jn 1:36-39). Andrew then told his brother, Simon Peter, that he had found the Messiah and brought Peter to Jesus (Jn 1:40-42). From then on Andrew faded into the background, and his brother came into prominence. Whenever the relationship of the two is mentioned, Andrew is always described as the brother of Simon Peter and never the other way around (Mt 4:18; Mk 1:16; Jn 1:40; 6:8), although Andrew is also mentioned without reference to his relationship to Peter (Mk 1:29; 3:18; 13:3; Jn 12:22). Andrew’s father was John (Mt 16:17; Jn 1:42; 21:15-17), and his hometown was Bethsaida (Jn 1:44), a village on the north shore of the Sea of Galilee.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John mentions disciples being with Jesus (2:2; 4:2), and it is likely that Andrew was one of that early group. Evidently, however, he returned to his activity as a fisherman on the Sea of Galilee, where he shared a house with Peter and his family in Capernaum (Mt 4:18-20; Mk 1:16-18, 29-33). While they were fishing, Andrew and Peter received a definite call to follow Jesus and become those who fish for people. From among the disciples of Jesus a group of 12 were later specially chosen as apostles. Andrew is always listed among the first four named, along with Peter and two other brothers, John and James (Mt 10:2-4; Lk 6:13-16; Acts 1:13).<\/p>\n<p>Andrew is named in only three other contexts in the Gospels. At the feeding of the 5,000 he called attention to the boy who had five barley loaves and two fish (Jn 6:8-9). When certain Greeks came to Philip, asking to see Jesus, Philip told Andrew and then the two of them told Jesus (Jn 12:20-22). Finally, Andrew is listed among those who were questioning Jesus privately on the Mt of Olives (Mk 13:3-4). The last NT mention of Andrew is in the list of apostles waiting in the upper room in Jerusalem for the promised outpouring of the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:12-14).<\/p>\n<p>Various documents associated with Andrew, such as the Acts of Andrew mentioned by the early church historian Eusebius, are of doubtful value. Some traditions indicate that Andrew ministered in Scythia. According to the Muratorian Canon, Andrew received a revelation at night that the apostle John should write the fourth Gospel. Tradition is rather uniform that Andrew died at Patrae in Achaia. A story developed that he was martyred on an X-shaped cross (a “decussate” or “saltire” cross), which has become known as St Andrew’s Cross. Another tradition is that an arm of the dead Andrew was taken into Scotland as a relic by Regulus, and thus Andrew became known as a patron saint of Scotland. On the calendar of saints of the Roman and Greek churches, Andrew’s date is set as November 30. <em>See<\/em> Apocrypha (Specific Titles of Apocryphal Writings): Andrew, Acts of; Andrew, Story of; Andrew and Matthias, Acts of; Andrew and Paul, Acts of.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Apostle, Apostleship.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ANDREW, The Apostle One of Christ’s 12 apostles. Andrew first appears in the NT as a disciple of John the Baptist (Jn 1:35, 40). After hearing John say, “Look, there is the Lamb of God!” (Jn 1:36), referring to Jesus, Andrew and another unnamed disciple followed Jesus and stayed with him for a day (Jn 1:36-39). Andrew then told his brother, Simon Peter, that he had found the Messiah and brought Peter to Jesus (Jn 1:40-42). From then on Andrew faded into the background, and his brother came in...","summary_en":"ANDREW, The Apostle One of Christ’s 12 apostles. Andrew first appears in the NT as a disciple of John the Baptist (Jn 1:35, 40). After hearing John say, “Look, there is the Lamb of God!” (Jn 1:36), referring to Jesus, Andrew and another unnamed disciple followed Jesus and stayed with him for a day (Jn 1:36-39). Andrew then told his brother, Simon Peter, that he had found the Messiah and brought Peter to Jesus (Jn 1:40-42). From then on Andrew faded into the background, and his brother came in...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19437,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jesus Christ","title_en":"Jesus Christ","content_ro":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","summary_en":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20126,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"John, the Apostle","title_en":"John, the Apostle","content_ro":"<h3>JOHN, The Apostle<\/h3>\n<p>The apostle known as “the disciple whom Jesus loved”; author of the fourth Gospel, three epistles, and probably Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>The apostle John has a high reputation among Christian people, and his influence has been felt throughout the centuries. Despite this, he is a surprisingly shadowy figure. When he appears in the pages of the NT, it is almost always in company with Peter or James, and if there is speaking to be done, it is usually his companion Peter who does it; thus, there is not a great deal on which to base a biography.<\/p>\n<p>John’s father’s name was Zebedee, and John had a brother called James (Mt 4:21). Among the women at the cross, Matthew names Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Joseph, and “the mother of Zebedee’s children” (27:56). Mark names the two Marys and adds Salome (Mk 15:40). This indicates that Salome may be the name of John’s mother. If Matthew and Mark are naming the same women as does John, then Salome was Jesus’ “mother’s sister” (Jn 19:25). This would make John a cousin of Jesus. We cannot be certain of this, for there were many women there (Mt 27:55) and there is no way of being sure that Matthew, Mark, and John all name the same three. Many accept the identification, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>John was among those whom Jesus called by the Sea of Galilee (Mt 4:21-22; Mk 1:19-20). This makes him one of the first disciples. It is also possible that he was the unnamed companion of Andrew when that apostle first followed Jesus (Jn 1:35-37). John was important in the little group around Jesus since he was one of three who were especially close to the Master. These disciples were selected to be with Jesus on many great occasions. John, along with his brother James and Peter, was present at the Transfiguration (Mt 17:1-2; Mk 9:2; Lk 9:28-29). Jesus also took just these three into the house of Jairus when he brought that man’s daughter back to life (Mk 5:37; Lk 8:51). Before Jesus’ arrest, it was this trio that he took to pray with him in the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:37; Mk 14:33). Though the three were admonished for sleeping instead of watching in prayer, we must not overlook the fact that in that time of great difficulty, when Jesus faced the prospect of death on a cross, it was to these three that he looked for support.<\/p>\n<p>There are other occasions when John is mentioned in the Gospels. Luke tells us of John’s surprise when the miraculous catch of fish took place (Lk 5:9-10). This is especially noteworthy since John was a fisherman. Toward the close of Jesus’ ministry, we find John coming to Jesus with Peter, James, and Andrew to ask when the end would come and what would be the sign when all things come to their climax (Mk 13:3-4). And on the last evening, Jesus sent Peter and John to prepare the Passover meal (Lk 22:8).<\/p>\n<p>Passages like these show that John was highly esteemed among the apostles and that he stood especially close to Jesus. But there are indications that at first John was far from appreciating what Jesus stood for. When Mark gives his list of the Twelve, he tells us that Jesus gave to James and John the name “Boanerges,” which means “sons of thunder” (Mk 3:17). Some in the early church understood this name as a compliment, thinking it meant that James’s and John’s witness to Jesus would be as strong as thunder. But most see it as pointing to their tempestuousness of character. We see this, for example, when John encounters a man who was casting out demons in Jesus’ name. John instructs him not to, “for he isn’t one of our group” (Mk 9:38; Lk 9:49).<\/p>\n<p>Mark also tells us of an occasion when the sons of Zebedee asked Jesus for the two chief places in his kingdom, one to be on his right and the other on his left (Mk 10:35-40). Matthew adds the point that the words were spoken by the men’s mother, but he leaves us no doubt that James and John were in on it (Mt 20:20-22). Jesus proceeded to ask them whether they could drink the cup he would drink and be baptized with the baptism he would receive. (Clearly, these are metaphors for the suffering Jesus would in due course undergo.) James and John affirmed that they could, and Jesus assured them that they would indeed do this. However, he gave them no assurance about their places in the Father’s kingdom. (But it is plain that James and John would suffer for Christ.) At that time they also failed to understand the loving spirit that moved their Master and was required of them as well.<\/p>\n<p>Another incident that shows the same tempestuous spirit is one involving Samaritan villagers who refused to receive the little band as they traveled. When James and John heard of it, they asked Jesus whether he wanted them to call down fire from heaven to consume the villagers (Lk 9:54). They were clearly at variance with Jesus, and indeed he rebuked them. But we should not miss the zeal they displayed for their Lord, nor their conviction that if they did call down fire it would come. They were sure that God would not fail to answer the prayer of those who asked for vengeance on the opponents of Jesus. There is zeal here and faith, though also a spirit of lovelessness.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels thus show us John as a zealous and loyal follower of Jesus. He is not depicted as gentle and considerate. At this time, he knew little of the love that should characterize a follower of Jesus, but he did have faith and a passionate conviction that God would prosper Jesus and those who served him.<\/p>\n<p>John is not mentioned by name in the fourth Gospel, but there are passages that speak about “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 13:23; 19:26; 20:2; 21:7, 20). We are not told who this was, but the evidence seems to indicate that it was the apostle John. For example, there is an account of a fishing trip in chapter 21, with a listing of those who went fishing. It includes Peter, who must be ruled out as “the disciple whom Jesus loved” because he is often mentioned along with the beloved disciple. Thomas and Nathanael were there, but there seems to be no reason for seeing either as a likely candidate. Two unnamed men and the sons of Zebedee make up the remainder of the party. James is excluded as being the author because of his early death—around <span>AD<\/span> 44 (Acts 12:2). This leaves us with John or one of the unnamed men. John is favored by the fact that the beloved disciple is linked with Peter on a number of occasions (Jn 13:23-24; 20:2; 21:7). We know from the other Gospels that Peter and John (together with James) were especially close (see also Acts 3; 8:14; Gal 2:9). Of course, one of the unnamed disciples may have been the beloved disciple, but we have no reason to assume this. Further, such a supposition faces the problem of the omission of the name of John the apostle throughout the entire fourth Gospel. If John wrote this book, we can understand his not mentioning himself. But if it was written by someone else, why would that person omit all mention of a man as prominent in the apostolic band as the other Gospels show John to have been? In addition, if John is the author, it would explain why John the Baptist is called simply “John.”<\/p>\n<p>It is argued that “the disciple whom Jesus loved” is not the kind of title a man would naturally use of himself, but it must be said also that it is not the kind of title a man would naturally use of someone else, either. And it may be that John uses it in a modest fashion—partly because he did not want to draw attention to himself by using his name, and partly because he wanted to emphasize the truth that it was the fact that Jesus loved him that made him what he was.<\/p>\n<p>If this identification may be accepted, we learn more about the apostle. We should not, of course, read the words “the disciple whom Jesus loved” as though they meant that Jesus did not love the other disciples. He loved them all. But as applied to John, they mean that he was indeed beloved, probably also that he recognized that he owed all he had and all he was to that love. That he was specially close to Jesus is indicated by the fact that he leaned on Jesus’ breast at the Last Supper (Jn 13:23). It also tells us something of his relationship to the Master that he was at the cross when Christ was crucified and that it was to him that Jesus gave the charge to look after his mother (19:26-27). One would have expected that Jesus would have selected one of his family for this responsibility. But his brothers did not believe in him, whereas both John and Mary did. This event certainly shows that a close relationship existed between Jesus and the disciple he loved.<\/p>\n<p>On the first Easter morning, John raced with Peter to the tomb when Mary Magdalene told them it was empty. He won the race but stood outside the tomb until Peter came. Peter, the leader of men, went right in, and John followed. We read that he “saw and believed” (Jn 20:8). Then in chapter 21 we read of the beloved disciple fishing with the others. Significantly, it was he who recognized that it was Jesus who stood on the shore and told them where to cast the net (21:7).<\/p>\n<p>There is not much to add to this picture when we turn to Acts. At the beginning, John’s name occurs in a list of the Twelve (Acts 1:13); and later, when we are told of James’s death, it is noted that he was John’s brother (12:2). In every other reference to John, he is in the company of Peter. These two were the instruments God used in bringing healing to a lame man (ch 3). At that time, they were going to the temple at the hour of prayer. This says something about their habits of devotion. Prayer at the ninth hour apparently refers to the Jewish service of prayer that was held at the same time as the evening offering (i.e., at about three o’clock in the afternoon). Evidently, Peter and John were continuing the devotional habits of pious Jews with an interest in the temple and all its doings. On another occasion, these two were arrested and jailed on account of their preaching about Jesus’ resurrection (4:1-3). They were brought before the council, where Peter spoke for them. The council saw that these two men were “uneducated, common men” (v 13). This means that they had never had the normal rabbinic education. By the standards of the council, they were uneducated. The council forbade them to speak about Jesus, but the apostles’ reply displays John’s typical boldness: “Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you rather than to God, you must judge; for we cannot but speak of what we have seen and heard” (vv 19-20, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>John was associated with Peter again when the gospel was first preached in Samaria. Philip was the evangelist to the Samaritans, but the apostles in Jerusalem decided to send Peter and John to Samaria when they heard how the people had accepted the gospel message. “As soon as they arrived, they began praying for these new Christians to receive the Holy Spirit” (Acts 8:15, <span>tlb<\/span>), a revealing illustration of apostolic priorities. In due course, they laid their hands on the new believers and they received the Holy Spirit (8:17). John is not specifically mentioned, but he no doubt was included in “the apostles” who were arrested and jailed because of the jealousy of prominent Jews (5:17-18). But that imprisonment did not last long, for an angel released them at night, so that they resumed their preaching in the early morning (v 21). John is mentioned by name in Galatians 2:9, where he is joined with Peter and James and the three are called “the pillars of the church.”<\/p>\n<p>This appears to be the extent of the NT’s record of the apostle John. Clearly he was an important figure in the little band of early Christians. On almost every occasion when he comes before us in the record, he is in the company of someone else and normally the speaking is done by his companion, not by John. But we may justly conclude that he stood very close to Jesus. Perhaps he had entered into the mind of Jesus more than any of the others. The best evidence of this is the Gospel of John. Clearly the man who wrote this had great spiritual insight. John may have been more the thinker than a man of action and leader of men.<\/p>\n<p>We have seen that there is good reason to think that the fourth Gospel was written by the apostle John. The epistles of John probably came from him also (though, as they stand, they are anonymous). All the Johannine writings probably emanated from the province of Asia. The heretics alluded to in 1 John resemble the Cerinthians (followers of the heretic Cerinthus), who were in Asia Minor at the end of the first century, and tradition connects the author of 1 John with Ephesus. It is certain that the same person wrote all three letters, and reasonably certain that this author also wrote the Gospel of John; the Gospel and the letters certainly represent the same mind at work in different situations.<\/p>\n<p>An author named John wrote the book of Revelation (Rv 1:1), though it is not clear whether this is the apostle or another John. Tradition has identified the John of Revelation (see Rv 1:1, 9; 22:8) with John the apostle, the author of the Gospel of John and the three letters of John. This view was held by Justin Martyr as early as 140. The main objection to this view is that the original Greek is unlike that of the other Johannine writings, showing scant respect for the rules of the language. Some have suggested that a different John wrote Revelation, others that John’s disciples wrote the Gospel and letters and that John himself wrote Revelation. But it is still plausible that the apostle John (or one of his close disciples) wrote the Gospel and the letters.<\/p>\n<p>Assuming John the apostle wrote Revelation, he was exiled to Patmos (Rv 1:9). But the date of this is uncertain. Some probably unreliable evidence from the late fifth century suggests that John was martyred at about the same time as his brother James (c. 44; see also Acts 12:2). Jesus’ prophecy in Mk 10:39 need not imply that both met with a simultaneous and violent end. Much stronger is the tradition reflected by Polycrates, bishop of Ephesus (c. 190), that John died a natural death in Ephesus, and by Irenaeus (c. 175–195) that John lingered on in Ephesus until the time of the emperor Trajan (ruled c. 97–117).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOHN, The Apostle<\/h3>\n<p>The apostle known as “the disciple whom Jesus loved”; author of the fourth Gospel, three epistles, and probably Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>The apostle John has a high reputation among Christian people, and his influence has been felt throughout the centuries. Despite this, he is a surprisingly shadowy figure. When he appears in the pages of the NT, it is almost always in company with Peter or James, and if there is speaking to be done, it is usually his companion Peter who does it; thus, there is not a great deal on which to base a biography.<\/p>\n<p>John’s father’s name was Zebedee, and John had a brother called James (Mt 4:21). Among the women at the cross, Matthew names Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Joseph, and “the mother of Zebedee’s children” (27:56). Mark names the two Marys and adds Salome (Mk 15:40). This indicates that Salome may be the name of John’s mother. If Matthew and Mark are naming the same women as does John, then Salome was Jesus’ “mother’s sister” (Jn 19:25). This would make John a cousin of Jesus. We cannot be certain of this, for there were many women there (Mt 27:55) and there is no way of being sure that Matthew, Mark, and John all name the same three. Many accept the identification, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>John was among those whom Jesus called by the Sea of Galilee (Mt 4:21-22; Mk 1:19-20). This makes him one of the first disciples. It is also possible that he was the unnamed companion of Andrew when that apostle first followed Jesus (Jn 1:35-37). John was important in the little group around Jesus since he was one of three who were especially close to the Master. These disciples were selected to be with Jesus on many great occasions. John, along with his brother James and Peter, was present at the Transfiguration (Mt 17:1-2; Mk 9:2; Lk 9:28-29). Jesus also took just these three into the house of Jairus when he brought that man’s daughter back to life (Mk 5:37; Lk 8:51). Before Jesus’ arrest, it was this trio that he took to pray with him in the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:37; Mk 14:33). Though the three were admonished for sleeping instead of watching in prayer, we must not overlook the fact that in that time of great difficulty, when Jesus faced the prospect of death on a cross, it was to these three that he looked for support.<\/p>\n<p>There are other occasions when John is mentioned in the Gospels. Luke tells us of John’s surprise when the miraculous catch of fish took place (Lk 5:9-10). This is especially noteworthy since John was a fisherman. Toward the close of Jesus’ ministry, we find John coming to Jesus with Peter, James, and Andrew to ask when the end would come and what would be the sign when all things come to their climax (Mk 13:3-4). And on the last evening, Jesus sent Peter and John to prepare the Passover meal (Lk 22:8).<\/p>\n<p>Passages like these show that John was highly esteemed among the apostles and that he stood especially close to Jesus. But there are indications that at first John was far from appreciating what Jesus stood for. When Mark gives his list of the Twelve, he tells us that Jesus gave to James and John the name “Boanerges,” which means “sons of thunder” (Mk 3:17). Some in the early church understood this name as a compliment, thinking it meant that James’s and John’s witness to Jesus would be as strong as thunder. But most see it as pointing to their tempestuousness of character. We see this, for example, when John encounters a man who was casting out demons in Jesus’ name. John instructs him not to, “for he isn’t one of our group” (Mk 9:38; Lk 9:49).<\/p>\n<p>Mark also tells us of an occasion when the sons of Zebedee asked Jesus for the two chief places in his kingdom, one to be on his right and the other on his left (Mk 10:35-40). Matthew adds the point that the words were spoken by the men’s mother, but he leaves us no doubt that James and John were in on it (Mt 20:20-22). Jesus proceeded to ask them whether they could drink the cup he would drink and be baptized with the baptism he would receive. (Clearly, these are metaphors for the suffering Jesus would in due course undergo.) James and John affirmed that they could, and Jesus assured them that they would indeed do this. However, he gave them no assurance about their places in the Father’s kingdom. (But it is plain that James and John would suffer for Christ.) At that time they also failed to understand the loving spirit that moved their Master and was required of them as well.<\/p>\n<p>Another incident that shows the same tempestuous spirit is one involving Samaritan villagers who refused to receive the little band as they traveled. When James and John heard of it, they asked Jesus whether he wanted them to call down fire from heaven to consume the villagers (Lk 9:54). They were clearly at variance with Jesus, and indeed he rebuked them. But we should not miss the zeal they displayed for their Lord, nor their conviction that if they did call down fire it would come. They were sure that God would not fail to answer the prayer of those who asked for vengeance on the opponents of Jesus. There is zeal here and faith, though also a spirit of lovelessness.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels thus show us John as a zealous and loyal follower of Jesus. He is not depicted as gentle and considerate. At this time, he knew little of the love that should characterize a follower of Jesus, but he did have faith and a passionate conviction that God would prosper Jesus and those who served him.<\/p>\n<p>John is not mentioned by name in the fourth Gospel, but there are passages that speak about “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 13:23; 19:26; 20:2; 21:7, 20). We are not told who this was, but the evidence seems to indicate that it was the apostle John. For example, there is an account of a fishing trip in chapter 21, with a listing of those who went fishing. It includes Peter, who must be ruled out as “the disciple whom Jesus loved” because he is often mentioned along with the beloved disciple. Thomas and Nathanael were there, but there seems to be no reason for seeing either as a likely candidate. Two unnamed men and the sons of Zebedee make up the remainder of the party. James is excluded as being the author because of his early death—around <span>AD<\/span> 44 (Acts 12:2). This leaves us with John or one of the unnamed men. John is favored by the fact that the beloved disciple is linked with Peter on a number of occasions (Jn 13:23-24; 20:2; 21:7). We know from the other Gospels that Peter and John (together with James) were especially close (see also Acts 3; 8:14; Gal 2:9). Of course, one of the unnamed disciples may have been the beloved disciple, but we have no reason to assume this. Further, such a supposition faces the problem of the omission of the name of John the apostle throughout the entire fourth Gospel. If John wrote this book, we can understand his not mentioning himself. But if it was written by someone else, why would that person omit all mention of a man as prominent in the apostolic band as the other Gospels show John to have been? In addition, if John is the author, it would explain why John the Baptist is called simply “John.”<\/p>\n<p>It is argued that “the disciple whom Jesus loved” is not the kind of title a man would naturally use of himself, but it must be said also that it is not the kind of title a man would naturally use of someone else, either. And it may be that John uses it in a modest fashion—partly because he did not want to draw attention to himself by using his name, and partly because he wanted to emphasize the truth that it was the fact that Jesus loved him that made him what he was.<\/p>\n<p>If this identification may be accepted, we learn more about the apostle. We should not, of course, read the words “the disciple whom Jesus loved” as though they meant that Jesus did not love the other disciples. He loved them all. But as applied to John, they mean that he was indeed beloved, probably also that he recognized that he owed all he had and all he was to that love. That he was specially close to Jesus is indicated by the fact that he leaned on Jesus’ breast at the Last Supper (Jn 13:23). It also tells us something of his relationship to the Master that he was at the cross when Christ was crucified and that it was to him that Jesus gave the charge to look after his mother (19:26-27). One would have expected that Jesus would have selected one of his family for this responsibility. But his brothers did not believe in him, whereas both John and Mary did. This event certainly shows that a close relationship existed between Jesus and the disciple he loved.<\/p>\n<p>On the first Easter morning, John raced with Peter to the tomb when Mary Magdalene told them it was empty. He won the race but stood outside the tomb until Peter came. Peter, the leader of men, went right in, and John followed. We read that he “saw and believed” (Jn 20:8). Then in chapter 21 we read of the beloved disciple fishing with the others. Significantly, it was he who recognized that it was Jesus who stood on the shore and told them where to cast the net (21:7).<\/p>\n<p>There is not much to add to this picture when we turn to Acts. At the beginning, John’s name occurs in a list of the Twelve (Acts 1:13); and later, when we are told of James’s death, it is noted that he was John’s brother (12:2). In every other reference to John, he is in the company of Peter. These two were the instruments God used in bringing healing to a lame man (ch 3). At that time, they were going to the temple at the hour of prayer. This says something about their habits of devotion. Prayer at the ninth hour apparently refers to the Jewish service of prayer that was held at the same time as the evening offering (i.e., at about three o’clock in the afternoon). Evidently, Peter and John were continuing the devotional habits of pious Jews with an interest in the temple and all its doings. On another occasion, these two were arrested and jailed on account of their preaching about Jesus’ resurrection (4:1-3). They were brought before the council, where Peter spoke for them. The council saw that these two men were “uneducated, common men” (v 13). This means that they had never had the normal rabbinic education. By the standards of the council, they were uneducated. The council forbade them to speak about Jesus, but the apostles’ reply displays John’s typical boldness: “Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you rather than to God, you must judge; for we cannot but speak of what we have seen and heard” (vv 19-20, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>John was associated with Peter again when the gospel was first preached in Samaria. Philip was the evangelist to the Samaritans, but the apostles in Jerusalem decided to send Peter and John to Samaria when they heard how the people had accepted the gospel message. “As soon as they arrived, they began praying for these new Christians to receive the Holy Spirit” (Acts 8:15, <span>tlb<\/span>), a revealing illustration of apostolic priorities. In due course, they laid their hands on the new believers and they received the Holy Spirit (8:17). John is not specifically mentioned, but he no doubt was included in “the apostles” who were arrested and jailed because of the jealousy of prominent Jews (5:17-18). But that imprisonment did not last long, for an angel released them at night, so that they resumed their preaching in the early morning (v 21). John is mentioned by name in Galatians 2:9, where he is joined with Peter and James and the three are called “the pillars of the church.”<\/p>\n<p>This appears to be the extent of the NT’s record of the apostle John. Clearly he was an important figure in the little band of early Christians. On almost every occasion when he comes before us in the record, he is in the company of someone else and normally the speaking is done by his companion, not by John. But we may justly conclude that he stood very close to Jesus. Perhaps he had entered into the mind of Jesus more than any of the others. The best evidence of this is the Gospel of John. Clearly the man who wrote this had great spiritual insight. John may have been more the thinker than a man of action and leader of men.<\/p>\n<p>We have seen that there is good reason to think that the fourth Gospel was written by the apostle John. The epistles of John probably came from him also (though, as they stand, they are anonymous). All the Johannine writings probably emanated from the province of Asia. The heretics alluded to in 1 John resemble the Cerinthians (followers of the heretic Cerinthus), who were in Asia Minor at the end of the first century, and tradition connects the author of 1 John with Ephesus. It is certain that the same person wrote all three letters, and reasonably certain that this author also wrote the Gospel of John; the Gospel and the letters certainly represent the same mind at work in different situations.<\/p>\n<p>An author named John wrote the book of Revelation (Rv 1:1), though it is not clear whether this is the apostle or another John. Tradition has identified the John of Revelation (see Rv 1:1, 9; 22:8) with John the apostle, the author of the Gospel of John and the three letters of John. This view was held by Justin Martyr as early as 140. The main objection to this view is that the original Greek is unlike that of the other Johannine writings, showing scant respect for the rules of the language. Some have suggested that a different John wrote Revelation, others that John’s disciples wrote the Gospel and letters and that John himself wrote Revelation. But it is still plausible that the apostle John (or one of his close disciples) wrote the Gospel and the letters.<\/p>\n<p>Assuming John the apostle wrote Revelation, he was exiled to Patmos (Rv 1:9). But the date of this is uncertain. Some probably unreliable evidence from the late fifth century suggests that John was martyred at about the same time as his brother James (c. 44; see also Acts 12:2). Jesus’ prophecy in Mk 10:39 need not imply that both met with a simultaneous and violent end. Much stronger is the tradition reflected by Polycrates, bishop of Ephesus (c. 190), that John died a natural death in Ephesus, and by Irenaeus (c. 175–195) that John lingered on in Ephesus until the time of the emperor Trajan (ruled c. 97–117).<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOHN, The Apostle The apostle known as “the disciple whom Jesus loved”; author of the fourth Gospel, three epistles, and probably Revelation. The apostle John has a high reputation among Christian people, and his influence has been felt throughout the centuries. Despite this, he is a surprisingly shadowy figure. When he appears in the pages of the NT, it is almost always in company with Peter or James, and if there is speaking to be done, it is usually his companion Peter who does it; thus, t...","summary_en":"JOHN, The Apostle The apostle known as “the disciple whom Jesus loved”; author of the fourth Gospel, three epistles, and probably Revelation. The apostle John has a high reputation among Christian people, and his influence has been felt throughout the centuries. Despite this, he is a surprisingly shadowy figure. When he appears in the pages of the NT, it is almost always in company with Peter or James, and if there is speaking to be done, it is usually his companion Peter who does it; thus, t...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20379,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>JOHN THE BAPTIST<\/h3>\n<p>Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29, while Jesus was still ministering.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>• Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>• John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>• Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>• The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BirthInfancyandBoyhood\">Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s Gospel is our only source of information concerning the birth and boyhood of John. The Gospel writer states that John was born in the hill country of Judah (Lk 1:39) of priestly descent, being the son of Zechariah, a priest of the order of Abijah, and Elizabeth, a descendant of Aaron (v 5). Both parents were righteous in the sight of God, following all the commandments closely (v 6). Like the birth of Jesus, only to a much lesser degree, the birth of John the Baptist is described in Luke as extraordinary. The angel Gabriel announced the coming birth to Zechariah in the temple; to the older, barren Elizabeth it came as an answer to prayer (vv 8-13). John’s name is announced to Zechariah by the angel, even as his purpose as forerunner is revealed before birth (vv 13-17). Such a consecration from birth is reminiscent of the call of the OT prophet Jeremiah (cf. Jer 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>There existed some familial relationship between the families of John and Jesus. Elizabeth is described as a relative of Mary (Lk 1:36), which may connote cousin or aunt, or may only mean being from the same tribe.<\/p>\n<p>John’s childhood, as that of Jesus, is left quite vague in the Gospel account. All that is said is that “John grew up and became strong in spirit. Then he lived out in the wilderness until he began his public ministry to Israel” (Lk 1:80, <span>nlt<\/span>). Some scholars have suggested that John might have been adopted as a boy by the Essenes (as was their practice) at Qumran and reared in their wilderness community, adjacent to the Dead Sea and near the Jordan River. There are some similarities between the activities of the Qumran sect, known through the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the later ministry of John the Baptist. Both practiced a type of asceticism and removed themselves from the life of Jerusalem. Both practiced baptism and associated this rite with initiation and repentance. Finally, John and the Qumran group were both eschatologically minded, awaiting God’s final end-time activity in history. Nevertheless, many significant differences exist between John and the Qumran sect.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AppearanceandIdentity\">Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>Mark’s Gospel begins with an account of John the Baptist’s appearance: “John the Baptist . . . lived in the wilderness and was preaching that people should be baptized to show that they had turned from their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Mk 1:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). A rich OT background lies behind John’s association with the wilderness, in this case the wilderness of Judea. It was in the wilderness that God revealed himself to Moses (Ex 3), gave the law, and entered into the covenant with Israel (ch 19). It was also the site of refuge for David (1 Sm 23–26; Ps 63) and Elijah (1 Kgs 19), and in this light became the anticipated site of God’s future deliverance (Is 40:3-5; Ez 47:1-12; Hos 2:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The unusual dress of John the Baptist—“clothing made of camel’s hair, with a leather belt around his waist” (Mk 1:6, <span>niv<\/span>)—may have suggested to his audience an association with Elijah in particular (2 Kgs 1:8) or with the prophets in general (Zec 13:4). His diet, “locusts and wild honey” (Mk 1:6), was Levitically clean, reflecting one who lived off the desert (such food was also eaten at Qumran) and formed part of the broader asceticism practiced by John and his disciples (Mt 9:14; 11:18).<\/p>\n<p>Who did John understand himself to be? In answer to questions by the multitude whether he was the Messiah, Elijah, or the expected prophet (Jn 1:20-23), John only identified himself as “a voice crying in the wilderness, ‘Prepare the way of the Lord’ ” (Is 40:3). The background for the question lies at the end of the OT period. Prophecy, on the one hand, was considered to have ceased (Zec 13:2-6); yet, on the other hand, it was expected to appear again before the coming of the messianic kingdom (see Jl 2:28-29; Mal 3:1-4). Some anticipated this final prophet to be one who was like Moses (Dt 18:15), others a returning Elijah as foretold in Malachi 4:5-6. While John personally refrained from identifying himself with these specific expectations (Jn 1:20-23), it is clear that his dress, lifestyle, and message caused the people to identify him with this end-time prophet (Mt 14:5; Mk 11:32). Jesus also saw John as this final “Elijah-like” prophet (Mt 11:7-15), who from Malachi’s prophecy was to be a forerunner to the coming of the Lord (Mal 3:1-4; 4:5-6).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsProclamation\">John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>John’s proclamation involved three elements: a warning of imminent judgment at the hands of the Coming One, a call for repentance in light of the coming kingdom of heaven, and a demand to express this repentance in concrete ethical terms. Many Jews looked forward confidently to the messianic judgment as a time of blessing for themselves and destruction for the gentile oppressors. John, however, warned that Jewish ancestry was false security in the coming judgment (Lk 3:8); true repentance was the only means of escaping destruction (Mt 3:2). John anticipated this judgment at the hands of the Coming One, who would baptize the nation with “the Holy Spirit and with fire” (Lk 3:16). Fire represented the OT means of destruction in the end time (Mal 4:1) as well as purification (Mal 3:1-4), while the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the end time connoted blessing (Is 32:15; Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28) and purification (Is 4:2-4). The judgment anticipated by John was therefore twofold: destruction for the unrepentant, and blessing for the penitent and righteous (Mt 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>In light of this imminent event John called for repentance on the part of his listeners (Mt 3:2), a true “turning back” or “turning toward” God in obedience that would bring forgiveness of sin. Such a turnabout in an individual’s relation with God should be lived out in one’s everyday dealings: fairness on the part of tax collectors (Lk 3:12-13) and soldiers (v 14), and the general requirement of compassion for the poor (vv 10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsBaptism\">John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels record that John baptized those repentant of their sins at several locations: the Jordan River (Mk 1:5), Bethany beyond the Jordan (Jn 1:28), and Aenon near Salim (Jn 3:23). This practice was an integral part of John’s call for repentance, given in light of the approaching judgment and the appearance of the Coming One. The baptism of the penitent symbolized desire for forgiveness of sin, a renunciation of past life, and a desire to be included in the coming messianic kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>What was the background for John’s practice of baptism? From the OT we know of ceremonial lustrations or washings that guaranteed ritual purity (Lv 14–15; Nm 19). Unlike John’s baptism, these washings were repetitive in nature and referred predominantly to ritual rather than moral cleansing. The prophets, however, urged a moral purification associated with the washing of water (Is 1:16-18; Jer 4:14). More significantly, the prophets anticipated a cleansing by God in the end times preceding the Day of Judgment (Ez 36:25; Zec 13:1; cf. Is 44:3), an eschatological element that John may have assumed was being fulfilled in his water baptism.<\/p>\n<p>Another precedent for John’s practice may have been proselyte baptism, a rite (along with circumcision and the offering of sacrifices) that constituted the conversion of a Gentile to Judaism. Common to both proselyte baptism and John’s baptism were the emphasis on an ethical break with the past, a once-for-all character, and the similarity of immersion. Notable differences were that John’s baptism was for Jews, not Gentile converts, and that it had a marked eschatological character as a preparation for the new age. Unless John, in light of the imminence of the messianic age, consciously treated all Jews as “pagan” in need of a baptism of repentance (cf. Mt 3:7-10), it is doubtful that proselyte baptism formed the primary background for John’s baptismal ministry.<\/p>\n<p>If John’s baptism had a clear association with the forgiveness of sin, the question naturally arises as to why Jesus, the Son of God, sought baptism from John. John himself asks this very question of Jesus (Mt 3:14), to which Jesus responds, “It must be done, because we must do everything that is right” (v 15, <span>nlt<\/span>). First, it is clear that Jesus’ baptism represented an act of obedience on his part to God’s will as he saw it. Second, by submitting to the baptism of John, Jesus was clearly validating the ministry and message of John. The imminent coming of the kingdom and its Messiah, and the need for repentance in anticipation of this event that John proclaimed, were affirmed by Jesus through baptism. Third, by being baptized, Jesus condemned the self-righteous for their lack of repentance and took a stand with the penitent publicans and sinners awaiting the kingdom of God (Lk 7:29-30). Fourth, Jesus stepped forward for baptism not as an individual in need of forgiveness but as one who represented the people of God. His baptism, therefore, demonstrated solidarity with the people in their need of deliverance, even as he is judged in their place on the cross. Finally, the voice from heaven (Mk 1:11) and the descent of the Spirit (Lk 3:21-22) signify the inauguration of Jesus’ own ministry through his baptism by John.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsViewofJesus\">John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>Throughout his ministry John pointed beyond himself to one “who is far greater than I am—so much greater that I am not even worthy to be his slave” (Mk 1:7, <span>nlt<\/span>). His self-understanding apparently sprang from the application of Isaiah 40:3 to himself, that he was the preparer or forerunner for God’s coming activity through the Messiah (Lk 3:4-6). When asked by curious spectators, John firmly denied that he was the Messiah, and according to the Gospel accounts, subordinated himself to the Coming One (Mk 1:7-8; Jn 1:26-28; 3:28-31). The coming of Jesus to baptism seems to represent the first time John identified these expectations with Jesus himself (Jn 1:35-36). His recognition of Jesus as the Messiah prior to baptism (Mt 3:14) was confirmed by the descent of the Holy Spirit as a dove and the voice from heaven quoting a phrase from an OT messianic psalm (Mk 1:11a, from Ps 2:7), together with a phrase from a Suffering Servant song of Isaiah (Mk 1:11b, from Is 42:1). In the fourth Gospel, John the Baptist goes even further in acknowledging Jesus to be the “Lamb of God” (Jn 1:29), in anticipation of Jesus’ sacrificial role on the cross. And John recognized him as “God’s Chosen One” (v 34, <span>neb<\/span>—another term for the Messiah; Ps 2:7, see Mk 1:11).<\/p>\n<p>In light of John’s strong affirmation, it is at first difficult to understand his questioning of Jesus while imprisoned: “Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?” (Mt 11:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). Some have suggested that John was merely asking for the sake of his disciples, or that the question reflected John’s despondency with being imprisoned. It is more likely, however, that the question represents John’s own confusion with the activity expected of the Messiah. John had proclaimed a Coming One who would bring a baptism of fire and judgment upon the wicked (Lk 3:16). It may have been difficult for him to understand Jesus’ different emphases on forgiveness and acceptance of sinners (Mt 9:9-13) and his healing of the sick (Mt 8–9). When John’s disciples brought their master’s question to Jesus, asking whether or not he was the Messiah, Jesus responded by quoting Isaiah 35:5-6 (see also Is 61:1). This text proclaims the activities of healing and proclaiming salvation to the poor to be fulfillments of the Messiah’s role, even though they may not have been what John or countless other Jews expected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusViewofJohn\">Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>That Jesus highly regarded John the Baptist is indicated by his baptism by John. It is also explicitly stated on several occasions. Jesus called him the greatest man to have ever lived (Lk 7:28). (Of course, he was not as great as Jesus, the God-man.) Jesus also said that John was a burning and shining lamp (Jn 5:33-35) and that he practiced a baptism divinely ordained (Lk 20:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>John’s uniqueness, however, lies in the fact that he stood at the turning of the ages. He was the last of the old era, the period of the law and the prophets (Lk 16:16), which was to precede the coming of the messianic age (the kingdom of God). John was the last of the prophets, the greatest of them, the Elijah figure who would prepare the way for the judgment of God (Mt 11:13-15; Lk 1:17). Because John belonged to the era of the law and the prophets, however, he was not as great as the “least” already in the kingdom of God (Mt 11:11)—that is, those who belonged to the era of the kingdom’s appearance in Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ArrestImprisonmentandMartyrdom\">Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>To understand why John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas, one has to grasp the messianic excitement caused by John’s appearance and message (Lk 3:15-18). Herod and other secular rulers were obviously suspicious of anyone who might stir up the crowds with predictions of a coming messianic ruler. Other messianic movements had arisen before John, which resulted in outbreaks of violence against the Roman-Herodian rulership. Moreover, Herod Antipas was under heavy criticism for his marriage with Herodias, the ex-wife of his brother Philip. His first marriage, with the daughter of Aretus II, constituted a political alliance between the Herodian family and the Nabatean kingdom of Perea. His new relationship with Herodias was perceived as a breach of the political alliance and led to friction between the two families. John’s denunciation of Herod’s new marriage (Mt 14:3-12) could thus have been interpreted by Herod as a subversive rousing of sentiment against his authority. The Jewish historian Josephus states that Herod did, in fact, arrest John because he feared John’s influence over the crowds. According to Josephus, John was imprisoned at the fortress Machaerus on the eastern side of the Dead Sea. That he was not killed immediately was due to Herod’s personal fear of the righteous John (Mk 6:2) and of the people’s reaction (Mt 14:5). On a point about which Josephus is silent, the Gospels record that it was Herodias’s feelings against John (Mk 6:17) and her plot, through the dancing of her daughter, which brought about the beheading of John (vv 21-29). John was beheaded at Herodias’s request in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29 or 30.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheDisciplesofJohn\">The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p>While it is clear that a band of disciples formed around John in his lifetime (Jn 1:35), to suggest that he intended to begin a continuing movement is contradicted by his message on the imminent Day of Judgment. Apparently, John’s disciples consisted of a small group of those who had been baptized by him and were awaiting the coming Messiah. Some transferred their loyalty to Jesus after John had identified Jesus as the Coming One (Jn 1:37). Others, however, apparently stayed on with their teacher, communicating with the imprisoned John concerning the activities of Jesus (Lk 7:18-23) and, after his death, taking the body for burial (Mk 6:29).<\/p>\n<p>We know little about the activities and practices of the band of disciples clustered around John. We do know, however, that fasting was one practice specifically associated with the group, and one that marked them as similar to the Pharisees (Mt 9:14). In this practice they no doubt followed the example of John himself (Lk 7:33). Prayer and fasting were often linked in late Judaism. The disciples of John were also known for the prayers taught by their master (11:1). Seeing this practice, the disciples of Jesus asked the Lord to teach them to pray, to which Jesus responded with the Lord’s Prayer (vv 2-4).<\/p>\n<p>After his death it is likely that other disciples of John joined the followers of Jesus (see Lk 7:29-30). Not all did so, however, as disciples of John were encountered by Paul and other Christians approximately 25 years later in Ephesus (Acts 18:24–29:7). Upon hearing witness to Jesus, these followers of John proclaimed Jesus as Messiah. When Paul baptized them in the name of Jesus they received the Holy Spirit (19:4-7). Even so, it is apparent from later documents that various groups continued to honor John, even considering him the Messiah, centuries after the NT period.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOHN THE BAPTIST<\/h3>\n<p>Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29, while Jesus was still ministering.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>• Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>• John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>• Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>• The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BirthInfancyandBoyhood\">Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s Gospel is our only source of information concerning the birth and boyhood of John. The Gospel writer states that John was born in the hill country of Judah (Lk 1:39) of priestly descent, being the son of Zechariah, a priest of the order of Abijah, and Elizabeth, a descendant of Aaron (v 5). Both parents were righteous in the sight of God, following all the commandments closely (v 6). Like the birth of Jesus, only to a much lesser degree, the birth of John the Baptist is described in Luke as extraordinary. The angel Gabriel announced the coming birth to Zechariah in the temple; to the older, barren Elizabeth it came as an answer to prayer (vv 8-13). John’s name is announced to Zechariah by the angel, even as his purpose as forerunner is revealed before birth (vv 13-17). Such a consecration from birth is reminiscent of the call of the OT prophet Jeremiah (cf. Jer 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>There existed some familial relationship between the families of John and Jesus. Elizabeth is described as a relative of Mary (Lk 1:36), which may connote cousin or aunt, or may only mean being from the same tribe.<\/p>\n<p>John’s childhood, as that of Jesus, is left quite vague in the Gospel account. All that is said is that “John grew up and became strong in spirit. Then he lived out in the wilderness until he began his public ministry to Israel” (Lk 1:80, <span>nlt<\/span>). Some scholars have suggested that John might have been adopted as a boy by the Essenes (as was their practice) at Qumran and reared in their wilderness community, adjacent to the Dead Sea and near the Jordan River. There are some similarities between the activities of the Qumran sect, known through the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the later ministry of John the Baptist. Both practiced a type of asceticism and removed themselves from the life of Jerusalem. Both practiced baptism and associated this rite with initiation and repentance. Finally, John and the Qumran group were both eschatologically minded, awaiting God’s final end-time activity in history. Nevertheless, many significant differences exist between John and the Qumran sect.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AppearanceandIdentity\">Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>Mark’s Gospel begins with an account of John the Baptist’s appearance: “John the Baptist . . . lived in the wilderness and was preaching that people should be baptized to show that they had turned from their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Mk 1:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). A rich OT background lies behind John’s association with the wilderness, in this case the wilderness of Judea. It was in the wilderness that God revealed himself to Moses (Ex 3), gave the law, and entered into the covenant with Israel (ch 19). It was also the site of refuge for David (1 Sm 23–26; Ps 63) and Elijah (1 Kgs 19), and in this light became the anticipated site of God’s future deliverance (Is 40:3-5; Ez 47:1-12; Hos 2:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The unusual dress of John the Baptist—“clothing made of camel’s hair, with a leather belt around his waist” (Mk 1:6, <span>niv<\/span>)—may have suggested to his audience an association with Elijah in particular (2 Kgs 1:8) or with the prophets in general (Zec 13:4). His diet, “locusts and wild honey” (Mk 1:6), was Levitically clean, reflecting one who lived off the desert (such food was also eaten at Qumran) and formed part of the broader asceticism practiced by John and his disciples (Mt 9:14; 11:18).<\/p>\n<p>Who did John understand himself to be? In answer to questions by the multitude whether he was the Messiah, Elijah, or the expected prophet (Jn 1:20-23), John only identified himself as “a voice crying in the wilderness, ‘Prepare the way of the Lord’ ” (Is 40:3). The background for the question lies at the end of the OT period. Prophecy, on the one hand, was considered to have ceased (Zec 13:2-6); yet, on the other hand, it was expected to appear again before the coming of the messianic kingdom (see Jl 2:28-29; Mal 3:1-4). Some anticipated this final prophet to be one who was like Moses (Dt 18:15), others a returning Elijah as foretold in Malachi 4:5-6. While John personally refrained from identifying himself with these specific expectations (Jn 1:20-23), it is clear that his dress, lifestyle, and message caused the people to identify him with this end-time prophet (Mt 14:5; Mk 11:32). Jesus also saw John as this final “Elijah-like” prophet (Mt 11:7-15), who from Malachi’s prophecy was to be a forerunner to the coming of the Lord (Mal 3:1-4; 4:5-6).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsProclamation\">John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>John’s proclamation involved three elements: a warning of imminent judgment at the hands of the Coming One, a call for repentance in light of the coming kingdom of heaven, and a demand to express this repentance in concrete ethical terms. Many Jews looked forward confidently to the messianic judgment as a time of blessing for themselves and destruction for the gentile oppressors. John, however, warned that Jewish ancestry was false security in the coming judgment (Lk 3:8); true repentance was the only means of escaping destruction (Mt 3:2). John anticipated this judgment at the hands of the Coming One, who would baptize the nation with “the Holy Spirit and with fire” (Lk 3:16). Fire represented the OT means of destruction in the end time (Mal 4:1) as well as purification (Mal 3:1-4), while the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the end time connoted blessing (Is 32:15; Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28) and purification (Is 4:2-4). The judgment anticipated by John was therefore twofold: destruction for the unrepentant, and blessing for the penitent and righteous (Mt 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>In light of this imminent event John called for repentance on the part of his listeners (Mt 3:2), a true “turning back” or “turning toward” God in obedience that would bring forgiveness of sin. Such a turnabout in an individual’s relation with God should be lived out in one’s everyday dealings: fairness on the part of tax collectors (Lk 3:12-13) and soldiers (v 14), and the general requirement of compassion for the poor (vv 10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsBaptism\">John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels record that John baptized those repentant of their sins at several locations: the Jordan River (Mk 1:5), Bethany beyond the Jordan (Jn 1:28), and Aenon near Salim (Jn 3:23). This practice was an integral part of John’s call for repentance, given in light of the approaching judgment and the appearance of the Coming One. The baptism of the penitent symbolized desire for forgiveness of sin, a renunciation of past life, and a desire to be included in the coming messianic kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>What was the background for John’s practice of baptism? From the OT we know of ceremonial lustrations or washings that guaranteed ritual purity (Lv 14–15; Nm 19). Unlike John’s baptism, these washings were repetitive in nature and referred predominantly to ritual rather than moral cleansing. The prophets, however, urged a moral purification associated with the washing of water (Is 1:16-18; Jer 4:14). More significantly, the prophets anticipated a cleansing by God in the end times preceding the Day of Judgment (Ez 36:25; Zec 13:1; cf. Is 44:3), an eschatological element that John may have assumed was being fulfilled in his water baptism.<\/p>\n<p>Another precedent for John’s practice may have been proselyte baptism, a rite (along with circumcision and the offering of sacrifices) that constituted the conversion of a Gentile to Judaism. Common to both proselyte baptism and John’s baptism were the emphasis on an ethical break with the past, a once-for-all character, and the similarity of immersion. Notable differences were that John’s baptism was for Jews, not Gentile converts, and that it had a marked eschatological character as a preparation for the new age. Unless John, in light of the imminence of the messianic age, consciously treated all Jews as “pagan” in need of a baptism of repentance (cf. Mt 3:7-10), it is doubtful that proselyte baptism formed the primary background for John’s baptismal ministry.<\/p>\n<p>If John’s baptism had a clear association with the forgiveness of sin, the question naturally arises as to why Jesus, the Son of God, sought baptism from John. John himself asks this very question of Jesus (Mt 3:14), to which Jesus responds, “It must be done, because we must do everything that is right” (v 15, <span>nlt<\/span>). First, it is clear that Jesus’ baptism represented an act of obedience on his part to God’s will as he saw it. Second, by submitting to the baptism of John, Jesus was clearly validating the ministry and message of John. The imminent coming of the kingdom and its Messiah, and the need for repentance in anticipation of this event that John proclaimed, were affirmed by Jesus through baptism. Third, by being baptized, Jesus condemned the self-righteous for their lack of repentance and took a stand with the penitent publicans and sinners awaiting the kingdom of God (Lk 7:29-30). Fourth, Jesus stepped forward for baptism not as an individual in need of forgiveness but as one who represented the people of God. His baptism, therefore, demonstrated solidarity with the people in their need of deliverance, even as he is judged in their place on the cross. Finally, the voice from heaven (Mk 1:11) and the descent of the Spirit (Lk 3:21-22) signify the inauguration of Jesus’ own ministry through his baptism by John.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsViewofJesus\">John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>Throughout his ministry John pointed beyond himself to one “who is far greater than I am—so much greater that I am not even worthy to be his slave” (Mk 1:7, <span>nlt<\/span>). His self-understanding apparently sprang from the application of Isaiah 40:3 to himself, that he was the preparer or forerunner for God’s coming activity through the Messiah (Lk 3:4-6). When asked by curious spectators, John firmly denied that he was the Messiah, and according to the Gospel accounts, subordinated himself to the Coming One (Mk 1:7-8; Jn 1:26-28; 3:28-31). The coming of Jesus to baptism seems to represent the first time John identified these expectations with Jesus himself (Jn 1:35-36). His recognition of Jesus as the Messiah prior to baptism (Mt 3:14) was confirmed by the descent of the Holy Spirit as a dove and the voice from heaven quoting a phrase from an OT messianic psalm (Mk 1:11a, from Ps 2:7), together with a phrase from a Suffering Servant song of Isaiah (Mk 1:11b, from Is 42:1). In the fourth Gospel, John the Baptist goes even further in acknowledging Jesus to be the “Lamb of God” (Jn 1:29), in anticipation of Jesus’ sacrificial role on the cross. And John recognized him as “God’s Chosen One” (v 34, <span>neb<\/span>—another term for the Messiah; Ps 2:7, see Mk 1:11).<\/p>\n<p>In light of John’s strong affirmation, it is at first difficult to understand his questioning of Jesus while imprisoned: “Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?” (Mt 11:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). Some have suggested that John was merely asking for the sake of his disciples, or that the question reflected John’s despondency with being imprisoned. It is more likely, however, that the question represents John’s own confusion with the activity expected of the Messiah. John had proclaimed a Coming One who would bring a baptism of fire and judgment upon the wicked (Lk 3:16). It may have been difficult for him to understand Jesus’ different emphases on forgiveness and acceptance of sinners (Mt 9:9-13) and his healing of the sick (Mt 8–9). When John’s disciples brought their master’s question to Jesus, asking whether or not he was the Messiah, Jesus responded by quoting Isaiah 35:5-6 (see also Is 61:1). This text proclaims the activities of healing and proclaiming salvation to the poor to be fulfillments of the Messiah’s role, even though they may not have been what John or countless other Jews expected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusViewofJohn\">Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>That Jesus highly regarded John the Baptist is indicated by his baptism by John. It is also explicitly stated on several occasions. Jesus called him the greatest man to have ever lived (Lk 7:28). (Of course, he was not as great as Jesus, the God-man.) Jesus also said that John was a burning and shining lamp (Jn 5:33-35) and that he practiced a baptism divinely ordained (Lk 20:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>John’s uniqueness, however, lies in the fact that he stood at the turning of the ages. He was the last of the old era, the period of the law and the prophets (Lk 16:16), which was to precede the coming of the messianic age (the kingdom of God). John was the last of the prophets, the greatest of them, the Elijah figure who would prepare the way for the judgment of God (Mt 11:13-15; Lk 1:17). Because John belonged to the era of the law and the prophets, however, he was not as great as the “least” already in the kingdom of God (Mt 11:11)—that is, those who belonged to the era of the kingdom’s appearance in Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ArrestImprisonmentandMartyrdom\">Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>To understand why John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas, one has to grasp the messianic excitement caused by John’s appearance and message (Lk 3:15-18). Herod and other secular rulers were obviously suspicious of anyone who might stir up the crowds with predictions of a coming messianic ruler. Other messianic movements had arisen before John, which resulted in outbreaks of violence against the Roman-Herodian rulership. Moreover, Herod Antipas was under heavy criticism for his marriage with Herodias, the ex-wife of his brother Philip. His first marriage, with the daughter of Aretus II, constituted a political alliance between the Herodian family and the Nabatean kingdom of Perea. His new relationship with Herodias was perceived as a breach of the political alliance and led to friction between the two families. John’s denunciation of Herod’s new marriage (Mt 14:3-12) could thus have been interpreted by Herod as a subversive rousing of sentiment against his authority. The Jewish historian Josephus states that Herod did, in fact, arrest John because he feared John’s influence over the crowds. According to Josephus, John was imprisoned at the fortress Machaerus on the eastern side of the Dead Sea. That he was not killed immediately was due to Herod’s personal fear of the righteous John (Mk 6:2) and of the people’s reaction (Mt 14:5). On a point about which Josephus is silent, the Gospels record that it was Herodias’s feelings against John (Mk 6:17) and her plot, through the dancing of her daughter, which brought about the beheading of John (vv 21-29). John was beheaded at Herodias’s request in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29 or 30.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheDisciplesofJohn\">The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p>While it is clear that a band of disciples formed around John in his lifetime (Jn 1:35), to suggest that he intended to begin a continuing movement is contradicted by his message on the imminent Day of Judgment. Apparently, John’s disciples consisted of a small group of those who had been baptized by him and were awaiting the coming Messiah. Some transferred their loyalty to Jesus after John had identified Jesus as the Coming One (Jn 1:37). Others, however, apparently stayed on with their teacher, communicating with the imprisoned John concerning the activities of Jesus (Lk 7:18-23) and, after his death, taking the body for burial (Mk 6:29).<\/p>\n<p>We know little about the activities and practices of the band of disciples clustered around John. We do know, however, that fasting was one practice specifically associated with the group, and one that marked them as similar to the Pharisees (Mt 9:14). In this practice they no doubt followed the example of John himself (Lk 7:33). Prayer and fasting were often linked in late Judaism. The disciples of John were also known for the prayers taught by their master (11:1). Seeing this practice, the disciples of Jesus asked the Lord to teach them to pray, to which Jesus responded with the Lord’s Prayer (vv 2-4).<\/p>\n<p>After his death it is likely that other disciples of John joined the followers of Jesus (see Lk 7:29-30). Not all did so, however, as disciples of John were encountered by Paul and other Christians approximately 25 years later in Ephesus (Acts 18:24–29:7). Upon hearing witness to Jesus, these followers of John proclaimed Jesus as Messiah. When Paul baptized them in the name of Jesus they received the Holy Spirit (19:4-7). Even so, it is apparent from later documents that various groups continued to honor John, even considering him the Messiah, centuries after the NT period.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOHN THE BAPTIST Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately AD 29, while Jesus was still ministering. Preview • Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood • Appearance and Identity • John’s Proclamation • ...","summary_en":"JOHN THE BAPTIST Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately AD 29, while Jesus was still ministering. Preview • Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood • Appearance and Identity • John’s Proclamation • ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":30013,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Peter, the Apostle","title_en":"Peter, the Apostle","content_ro":"<h3>PETER, <span>The Apostle<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>One of the 12 disciples; rose to prominence both among the disciples during Jesus’ ministry and among the apostles afterwards.<\/p>\n<p>There are actually four forms of Peter’s name in the New Testament: the Hebrew translated into Greek, “Simeon” to “Simon,” and the Aramaic translated into Greek, “Cephas” to “Petros” (meaning “rock”). His given name was Simeon bar-Jonah (Mt 16:17; cf. Jn 1:42), “Simon the son of John,” which was common Semitic nomenclature. It is most likely that “Simon” was not merely the Greek equivalent of “Simeon” but that, having his home in bilingual Galilee, “Simon” was the alternate form he used in dealings with Gentiles. In fact, it was quite common for a cosmopolitan Jew to employ three forms of his name depending on the occasion: Aramaic, Latin, and Greek. The double name “Simon Peter” (or “Simon called Peter”) demonstrates that the second name was a later addition, similar to “Jesus, the Christ.” The number of times that the Aramaic equivalent “Cephas” is used (once in John, four times each in Galatians and 1 Corinthians), as well as its translation into the Greek (not common with proper names), indicates the importance of the secondary name. Both Aramaic and Greek forms mean “the rock,” an obvious indication of Peter’s stature in the early church (see below on Mt 16:18). It is obvious that he was called “Simon” throughout Jesus’ ministry but came to be known as “Peter” more and more in the apostolic age.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Background<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Conversion and Call<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Place among the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>• Peter the Rock<\/p>\n<p>• Peter the Apostle<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Future Ministry<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersBackground\">Peter’s Background<\/p>\n<p>Peter was raised in bilingual Galilee. John 1:44 says that the home of Andrew (his brother) and Peter was Bethsaida, the whereabouts of which is difficult to place archaeologically. The only site about which we know is east of the Jordan in the district called Gaulanitis. Yet John 12:21 places Bethsaida in Galilee; however, it is possible that John is reflecting the popular use of the term “Galilee” rather than the legally correct one. Peter and Andrew had a fishing business centered in Capernaum (Mk 1:21, 29) and perhaps were partners with James and John (Lk 5:10). It is also likely that they intermittently continued in their business while disciples, as indicated in the fishing scene in John 21:1-8.<\/p>\n<p>One difficulty with this is the series of statements saying, “We have left all and followed You” (Mt 19:27; Mk 10:28; Lk 18:28, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The majority of interpreters have given this an absolute sense of “sold” or “left” their business. However, Luke 18:28 occurs in the context of leaving their homes but obviously is not meant in an absolute sense. It seems most likely that the disciples did leave the practice of their fishing businesses to follow Christ, but kept the tools of their trade and returned to their trades when necessary.<\/p>\n<p>They certainly did not abandon their families, as evidenced by Peter, who returned to his home at the end of each tour. The New Testament tells us that Peter was married. In Mark 1:29-31 Jesus heals his mother-in-law, who perhaps was living with Peter. In fact, it is possible that his home became Jesus’ headquarters in Galilee. (Matthew 8:14 may indicate that Jesus dwelt there.) First Corinthians 9:5 says that Peter, along with the other married apostles, often took his wife with him on his missionary journeys. Later tradition speaks of his children (Clement of Alexandria’s <em>Stromateis<\/em> 2.6.52) and says that Peter was present at the martyrdom of his wife (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 3.30.2).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersConversionandCall\">Peter’s Conversion and Call<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s brother, Andrew, was a disciple of John the Baptist, according to John 1:35-40. This follows the witness of John in 1:29-34 and is the second stage of John’s discipleship drama in chapter one—i.e., after bearing witness he now sends his own followers to Jesus. Andrew and the unnamed disciple (perhaps Philip as in Jn 1:43 or the “beloved disciple,” whom many identify with John himself) then “follow” Jesus (a term used often in John for discipleship). The next day Andrew follows the Baptist’s example and finds his brother Simon, saying, “We have found the Messiah” (Jn 1:41, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Peter’s conversion is presupposed in John 1:42, where Simon is brought to Jesus by Andrew and there given a new name.<\/p>\n<p>There are three separate episodes in the Gospels in which Simon is called, and these overlap with three episodes in which he is given the name “Cephas” (“Peter,” which means “rock”) by Jesus. John locates the event in Judea where John the Baptist was baptizing. The synoptic Gospels have two different scenes. The first call takes place at the Sea of Galilee (Mk 1:16-20; Mt 4:18-22). Jesus is walking along the shore and sees Peter and Andrew along with James and John casting their nets into the sea. At this time he calls them to become “fishers of men.” Luke then expands this into a fishing scene (Lk 5:1-11), in which the disciples have fished all night and caught nothing but at the command of Jesus lower their nets and catch an amount of fish so great that the boat starts to sink. The episode concludes exactly like the Markan abbreviated form: Jesus says that from now on they will “catch men,” and as a result they leave everything and follow him.<\/p>\n<p>The second synoptic episode involving Peter’s call (and his new name) is the official choice of the Twelve upon the mountain (Mk 3:13-19 and parallels); in the list of the names we have “Simon he surnamed Peter.” The final occurrence dealing with Peter’s new name is found in Matthew 16:17-19, in connection with Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi.<\/p>\n<p>It is somewhat difficult to harmonize these episodes properly. Were there three different episodes in which Simon was called (Jn 1:42; Mk 1:20; 3:16) and three separate incidents in which he was given the name Cephas\/Peter (Jn 1:42; Mk 3:16; Mt 16:18)? It is attractive to a broad spectrum of academia to assume that one single event, which happened at some indeterminate time toward the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, was later expanded into these diverse traditions. However, a closer examination of the Gospel data does not necessitate such a conclusion. John 1:35-42 is not an institutional scene that connotes an official call. Rather, it describes the first encounter with Jesus and realization regarding his significance. The “renaming” is in the future tense and looks to a later event. Moreover, John deliberately omits most of the crisis events in Jesus’ life (the baptism, the choice of the Twelve, the Transfiguration, the words of institution at the Last Supper, Gethsemane) and replaces them with highly theological scenes that teach the spiritual significance of the events. This is what he has done here.<\/p>\n<p>The same is true of the first synoptic call, i.e., the fishing scene. Again, there is no hint of official ordination to office here but rather a proleptic or prophetic hint of future ministry. This is especially true of the highly theological scene in Luke, which promises abundant results. Again in all three accounts the future tense is employed: “I will make you fishers of men” (Matthew and Mark), “You will catch men” (Luke, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The call in Mark 1:20 and Matthew 4:21 and their reaction (leaving all behind and following Jesus) is the opening gambit that is finalized in the actual institutional scene in Mark 3:13-19 and parallels. The wording does not indicate that these two episodes are doublets, for the actual appointment of the disciples occurs in the second passage. We must differentiate between the original call to one segment (who became the so-called “inner circle” of the Twelve) and the final choice of all the disciples.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersPlaceamongtheTwelve\">Peter’s Place among the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>The prominence of Simon Peter in the Gospels and Acts cannot be disputed. While some have attempted to attribute this to his leadership role in the later church, there is no basis for that in the text of the NT. From the very beginning Simon attained preeminence above the others. In the lists of the Twelve just mentioned, Simon’s name always appears first, and in Matthew 10:2 it introduces his name as “the first.” Moreover, the Twelve are often designated “Peter and those with him” (Mk 1:36; Lk 9:32; 8:45, <span>nkjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Throughout the accounts Peter acted and spoke on behalf of the other disciples. At the Transfiguration it is Peter who wanted to erect tents (Mk 9:5), and he alone had sufficient faith to attempt walking on the water (Mt 14:28-31). It is Peter who asks the Lord to explain his teaching on forgiveness (Mt 18:21) and parables (Mt 15:15; Lk 12:41) and who speaks the disciples’ minds in Matthew 19:27, “Behold, we have left everything and followed you; what’s in it for us?” (paraphrased). The collectors of the temple tax come to Peter as leader of the group (Mt 17:24). As a member of the inner circle (with James and John, possibly Andrew in Mk 13:3) he was often alone with Jesus (at the raising of Jairus’s daughter, Mk 5:37 and parallels; at the Transfiguration, Mk 9:2 and parallels; at Gethsemane, Mk 14:33 and Mt 26:37). Jesus asks Peter and John to prepare the Passover meal in Luke 22:8, and in Mark 14:37 (and Mt 26:40) he directs his rebuke to Peter as representing the others (“Could ye not watch with me one hour?”). Finally, the message of the angel at the tomb as recorded in Mark 16:7 said, “Go your way, tell his disciples and Peter.” Certainly Peter held a very special place among the Twelve.<\/p>\n<p>This was especially evident in the Caesarea Philippi episode (Mk 8:27-33 and parallels). It was Peter whose confession became the high point of the Gospel accounts, “Thou art the Christ” (Luke adds “of God”; Matthew, “the Son of the living God”). After Jesus then spoke of the suffering of the Son of Man, Peter rebuked him, and in Mark’s description Jesus then turned, gazed at all the disciples, and said to Peter, “Get thee behind me, Satan: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but the things that be of men” (v 33, <span>kjv<\/span>). This was obviously directed at them all through Peter.<\/p>\n<p>The portrait of Peter that comes through all four accounts pictures him as impulsive, often rash; he is the first to act and speak his mind and was typified by his enthusiasm for everything in which he had a part. At the sight of Jesus walking on the water, Peter asked that the Lord command him to do the same and then immediately leaped out of the boat and began doing just that. At the Transfiguration, while the others were awed into silence by the appearance of Moses and Elijah, Peter the man of action said, “If thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles” (Mt 17:4, <span>kjv<\/span>). Mark and Luke both add here that Peter did not know what he was saying. Peter’s unguarded and unthinking tendency to protest Jesus’ statements is seen not only at Caesarea Philippi but also at the foot-washing scene in John 13:4-11 when he said first, “You shall never ever wash my feet”; and then after Jesus’ strong retort, “If I do not wash you, you have no part with Me,” he reversed himself completely, stating, “Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and head” (13:8-9, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Finally, in the account of the race to the tomb (Jn 20:2-10), the beloved disciple, reaching the tomb first, paused while Peter immediately and impulsively entered it. Peter was certainly one who “rushed in where angels fear to tread.” However, this very trait aligns him with all of us and may be one of the major reasons why he becomes the representative disciple throughout the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetertheRock\">Peter the Rock<\/p>\n<p>The key to the significance of Simon Peter is obviously the controversial addendum to the Caesarea Philippi episode, found only in Matthew 16:17-19, Jesus’ testimonial to Peter. There are several crucial aspects of this saying. The most important for this study is verse 18, “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church” (<span>kjv<\/span>). There have been many interpretations of this down through history: (1) It refers to Peter as the “rock” or first bishop of the church. This was the Roman Catholic interpretation from the third century on and was employed as a prooftext for apostolic succession, but it is not hinted at anywhere in the context or even in the epistles: it was not a first-century concept. (2) The majority of Protestants since the Reformation have taken this to be a reference to Peter’s statement of faith rather than to Peter himself; but this neglects the wordplay, which is even more pronounced in Aramaic, which has only one form for “Cephas” (rock). (3) An alternative has been to take “this rock” as a reference to Jesus himself, but that is fanciful and is hardly in the context. In conclusion, “this rock” is almost certainly a reference to Peter, but it must be understood in two ways. First, Peter was to become the foundation upon which Christ would build his church, a position clearly attested to in Acts. This does not mean that Peter had an authority above the other apostles. Paul’s rebuke of Peter in Galatians 2:11-14 demonstrates that he was not above them, and at the Jerusalem council in Acts 15 it is James who has the position of leadership. Second, Peter is seen here not merely as an individual but as the representative of the disciples. This view is coming to increasing prominence today. It recognized the Jewish concept of “corporate identity” in which the leader was identified with the corporate body (e.g., the king or high priest representing the nation before God). This concept is also in keeping with Matthew 18:18-20, which passes on the same authority to the church as is here given to Peter. In this view Peter as the rock becomes the first of the building blocks upon which Christ, the chief cornerstone (to continue the metaphor), will build his church (see Eph 2:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>Two other aspects are worthy of note here. First, verse 18 says, “the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” The “gates of hell” is a common Jewish euphemism for death’s inevitable and irrevocable power. Jesus is saying that Satan will not be triumphant over the church, and his sphere of operations, death, will be defeated (cf. 1 Cor 15:26, 54-55). The church would undergo persecution and martyrdom, but the church would be triumphant.<\/p>\n<p>Second, verse 19 promises, “I will give unto thee [singular] the keys of the kingdom,” another statement used of apostolic succession by the medieval church. Again, this must be understood in light of corporate identity; Peter, as the preeminent figure in the early church, here embodies the community in his leadership. The “keys of the kingdom” are in direct contrast to the “gates of hell” (cf. Rv 1:18, “the keys of hell and death” and Rv 3:7, the “key of David”), and this follows the imagery of the building seen in the rock upon which Christ will build his church. Here Peter is given the keys that will unlock the power of the kingdom in building God’s community, the church. The future tense (“will give”) undoubtedly points to the postresurrection period, when that power was unleashed and the church erected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetertheApostle\">Peter the Apostle<\/p>\n<p>Two events led to the new Peter who fills the pages of Acts: his reinstatement described in John 21:15-17 and the resurrection appearance of the Lord, which is never described but alluded to in Luke 24:34 and 1 Corinthians 15:5. His denial was certainly proof that he was not yet able to assume his predicted position as the rock of the church. Both Luke and Paul seem to state that the risen Lord appeared to Simon Peter before the others, which would be fitting in light of his preeminence in the early church. During the Palestinian era, the fifteen-year period prior to the Gentile mission, Peter was the leading figure. The others mentioned in Acts 1–12 are all secondary to Peter, the dominant director of church policy. These include John, who is with Peter in the temple (3:1), the prison (4:13), and Samaria (8:14); Stephen, who was one of the Seven and whose revolutionary preaching led to his martyrdom (chs 6–7); Philip, another of the Seven who proclaimed the gospel in Samaria and to the Ethiopian eunuch (ch 8); Barnabas, who set an example of communal sharing (4:36-37) and was an official delegate to Antioch (11:20-30); Paul, a miraculous convert and witness (9:1-30; 11:25-30; 12:25); and James, who became the first apostolic martyr (12:2). It is Peter who proposes the choice of the 12th disciple (1:15-17), who proclaims the gospel at Pentecost (2:14-40), who utters the healing word (3:6), and who defends the gospel before the Sanhedrin (4:8-12, 19-20; 5:29-32). The episode regarding Ananias and Sapphira is particularly poignant, for here Peter functions as the avenging messenger of God; nowhere is his authority more evident. We would also note his authority in the scene at Samaria concerning the attempt of Simon the Sorcerer to buy the charismatic power (8:18-24). Again, it is Peter whose influence commands the situation. In these two incidents we certainly see the “binding and loosing” jurisdiction (cf. Mt 16:19) exhibited in Peter.<\/p>\n<p>Yet Peter and the church still came under the strictures of their Jewish heritage. The evidence points to a Jewish proselyte self-consciousness on the part of the early church. They viewed themselves as the righteous remnant, living in the age of Messianic fulfillment, but still interpreted themselves in a Jewish sense and conducted their evangelism in the proselyte form of Jewish particularism (i.e., Gentiles could only be converted through Judaism). Two events altered this. First, the Hellenistic Jewish branch of the church rebelled against the Hebrew Christians, which resulted in the appointment of the seven deacons and a change in the orthodox policy of the Palestinian church. Second, this then led to a new preaching ministry, first by Stephen, whose insights ended in his martyrdom and the dispersal of the Hellenistic branch in chapter 8; then by Philip and others, who extended the gospel even further, to the Samaritans and God-fearers. As a further result, Peter and John came to Samaria (8:14), the next significant step toward the Gentile mission. Thus ended the centrality of Jerusalem in the unfolding story.<\/p>\n<p>The two miracles of Peter, at Lydda (the paralytic) and Joppa (raising the dead woman) in Acts 9:32-42, are probably intended to parallel similar miracles of Jesus in Luke’s first work (Lk 5:18-26; 8:49-56). This is part of a major theme in Acts whereby Jesus’ life and ministry are paralleled and continued in the work of the Spirit through the church. Again Peter is seen in a representative role.<\/p>\n<p>The new relationships are extended in two further scenes. First, Peter stays with “Simon, a tanner,” in Joppa, an unclean trade; no pious Jew would knowingly have social contact with such a one. Even more important, God teaches Peter through a dream (10:10-16) that the old dichotomy between clean and unclean has been broken. This then leads Peter to the home of an uncircumcised Gentile, the most serious social taboo for the Jew, and subsequent events force Peter to admit Gentiles into the church without the necessity of Jewish proselyte requirements. The serious consequences of this are seen in the debate that ensued in Jerusalem (Acts 11:2-3) and later at the council (Acts 15:1-21). The centrality of this event is demonstrated in the extent to which Luke reproduces Peter’s speech, which seems to be a repetition of chapter 10 but is meant to highlight this crucial episode. Often forgotten in the significance of this for the early church is the fact that for Luke the Gentile mission begins with Peter, not Paul. He is the one upon whom the salvific act of God descends; and as the leader of the church, he was the first important witness to it.<\/p>\n<p>The persecution of Herod Agrippa (Acts 12:1-4) was likely due to the furor caused by this free intercourse with Gentiles; and it ended the period of Peter’s leadership in Jerusalem. The Jewish people were greatly offended by the new Christian push; and according to Luke in Acts, the idyllic period of popularity, in which the common people supported the church, effectively ceased at this time. Peter’s miraculous release and the dramatic scene at Mary’s house typified the special place of Peter, but the momentum shifts. Peter is forced to flee Jerusalem, and in the interim James arises to leadership (Acts 12:17); at the Jerusalem council it is the latter who has the chair and presents the council’s decision (Acts 15:6-29).<\/p>\n<p>The exact relationship between Peter and the other disciples, especially with the so-called pillars—James and John—and the apostle Paul, cannot be ascertained. The evidence is too vague. Many have thought that indeed there were no truly universal leaders, for the early church was too diverse. However, that is unlikely, and Luke’s portrayal in Acts parallels Paul’s statement in Galatians 2:8 that Peter was the apostle par excellence to the “circumcised” and Paul to the “Gentiles.” They were the universal leaders, while James became the local leader of the Jerusalem eldership. However, neither Peter nor Paul had dominical status similar to that of later popes (i.e., neither was the absolute spokesman of the church and above criticism). So-called emissaries from James could have such an influence on Peter that he would hypocritically change his behavior before Gentiles (Gal 2:12), and Paul could rebuke Peter publicly for doing so (Gal 2:11-14). Paul never claimed authority over the other disciples and even sought their approval and “the right hands of fellowship” for his ministry to the Gentiles (Gal 2:1-10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersFutureMinistry\">Peter’s Future Ministry<\/p>\n<p>We have very little hard evidence for Peter’s other movements. It seems as though Peter gradually turned from leadership to missionary work. However, this is an oversimplification. It is most likely that, following the similar pattern of Paul, he combined the two. The presence of a “Cephas party” at Corinth (1 Cor 1:12; 3:22) may indicate that Peter had spent some time there. This is made even more likely when Paul uses Peter as the main example for taking one’s wife on missionary expeditions (1 Cor 9:5). The “Cephas party” probably consisted of those who were converted under his ministry; it is probable that they were Jewish Christians and opposed the “Paul party” on Jewish-Gentile debates reflected elsewhere in 1 Corinthians.<\/p>\n<p>The First Epistle of Peter was sent to churches in northern Asia Minor—the provinces of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia. The problem here is that there is no hint that Peter had been there and no personal notations in the epistle to demonstrate his acquaintance with these churches. However, it does show that he was very interested in them. In fact, some believe that the reason why Paul was not allowed into this district according to Acts 16:7-8 was that Peter was already ministering there. In short, the question of Peter’s involvement in Asia Minor must remain an open one.<\/p>\n<p>There is no final NT evidence that Peter went to Rome. First Peter 5:13 says that the epistle was sent from “Babylon,” and it is doubtful that this was the literal Babylon, because there is no tradition that Peter ever went there, and Babylon was sparsely populated back then. It is probably a cryptic symbol for Rome, the “Babylon of the West.” It is most likely that the “Babylon” of Revelation 14:8 and 16:19 is also a symbol of Rome. This would fit the strong tradition in the early church that indeed Peter did minister there.<\/p>\n<p>There are four early external witnesses concerning Peter’s death. John 21:18 mentions only the martyrdom of Peter but does not give any hint as to the place. First Clement was written at the end of the first century and reports the martyrdom of Peter and Paul among others. While 1 Clement 5:4 testifies only to the fact and not the place of Peter’s martyrdom, a study of two aspects favors Rome—the reference to a “great multitude” of martyrdoms, which best fits the Neronian persecution, and the phrase “glorious example among us,” which shows that the people of Clement’s own church (Rome) were involved. Ignatius’s letter to the Romans (4:3) also testifies generally to the martyrdom of Peter and Paul, and again the context favors Rome as the place. He says, “I did not command you as did Peter and Paul,” which shows that they had ministries in Rome. The Ascension of Isaiah 4:2-3, a Jewish Christian work of the same period, speaks of Beliar (probably Nero) who martyrs “one of the Twelve,” almost certainly Peter. Therefore the earliest evidence does not explicitly point to Rome as the place of Peter’s death, but that is the most likely hypothesis.<\/p>\n<p>Definite statements to that effect appear toward the end of the second century. Dionysius, bishop of Corinth, in a letter dated c. 170 (preserved in Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 2.25.8) says that Peter and Paul taught together in Italy. At the end of that century Irenaeus says (in <em>Against Heresies<\/em> 2.1-3) that Peter and Paul preached in Rome, and Tertullian in the same general period adds that Peter was martyred “like . . . the Lord” (<em>Scorpiace<\/em> 15). Clement of Alexandria and Origen both allude to Peter’s presence in Rome, and the latter adds the belief that he was “crucified head-downwards” (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 2.15.2; 3.1.2). The tradition that Peter was crucified may be supported in John 21:18: “when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall . . . carry thee wither thou wouldest not” (<span>kjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The fact that Paul’s Epistle to the Romans (c. 55–57) does not mention Peter tells us that he could not have gone there earlier than that. If 1 Peter was written during the Neronian persecution, as those who hold to Petrine authorship believe, he must have gone there sometime in the late 50s or early 60s. Of course, the extent of his ministry in Rome also cannot be known. Some indeed have posited that he had little or no extensive stay in Rome. The facts, as they can be recovered, point to certain tentative conclusions. Peter did have some type of ministry in Rome, though the extent of it cannot be known. However, it is doubtful, in light of the early testimony to his preaching ministry there, that he was merely passing through Rome when caught in Nero’s pogrom. Therefore he most likely spent the last years of his ministry in Rome and there suffered martyrdom under Nero, perhaps by crucifixion.<\/p>\n<p>Simon Peter, along with Paul, was the leading figure in the early church. His impact has been tragically dimmed by the acrimonious debates of Roman Catholic– Protestant circles, but the biblical evidence is clear. He was the leading disciple of Jesus and indeed the “rock” who provided the foundation for the church. As the representative disciple, his enthusiasm and even his weaknesses have made him the supreme example of the developing disciple, one who, through the power of the risen Lord, rose above his faults to become a towering figure on the church scene.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PETER, <span>The Apostle<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>One of the 12 disciples; rose to prominence both among the disciples during Jesus’ ministry and among the apostles afterwards.<\/p>\n<p>There are actually four forms of Peter’s name in the New Testament: the Hebrew translated into Greek, “Simeon” to “Simon,” and the Aramaic translated into Greek, “Cephas” to “Petros” (meaning “rock”). His given name was Simeon bar-Jonah (Mt 16:17; cf. Jn 1:42), “Simon the son of John,” which was common Semitic nomenclature. It is most likely that “Simon” was not merely the Greek equivalent of “Simeon” but that, having his home in bilingual Galilee, “Simon” was the alternate form he used in dealings with Gentiles. In fact, it was quite common for a cosmopolitan Jew to employ three forms of his name depending on the occasion: Aramaic, Latin, and Greek. The double name “Simon Peter” (or “Simon called Peter”) demonstrates that the second name was a later addition, similar to “Jesus, the Christ.” The number of times that the Aramaic equivalent “Cephas” is used (once in John, four times each in Galatians and 1 Corinthians), as well as its translation into the Greek (not common with proper names), indicates the importance of the secondary name. Both Aramaic and Greek forms mean “the rock,” an obvious indication of Peter’s stature in the early church (see below on Mt 16:18). It is obvious that he was called “Simon” throughout Jesus’ ministry but came to be known as “Peter” more and more in the apostolic age.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Background<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Conversion and Call<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Place among the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>• Peter the Rock<\/p>\n<p>• Peter the Apostle<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Future Ministry<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersBackground\">Peter’s Background<\/p>\n<p>Peter was raised in bilingual Galilee. John 1:44 says that the home of Andrew (his brother) and Peter was Bethsaida, the whereabouts of which is difficult to place archaeologically. The only site about which we know is east of the Jordan in the district called Gaulanitis. Yet John 12:21 places Bethsaida in Galilee; however, it is possible that John is reflecting the popular use of the term “Galilee” rather than the legally correct one. Peter and Andrew had a fishing business centered in Capernaum (Mk 1:21, 29) and perhaps were partners with James and John (Lk 5:10). It is also likely that they intermittently continued in their business while disciples, as indicated in the fishing scene in John 21:1-8.<\/p>\n<p>One difficulty with this is the series of statements saying, “We have left all and followed You” (Mt 19:27; Mk 10:28; Lk 18:28, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The majority of interpreters have given this an absolute sense of “sold” or “left” their business. However, Luke 18:28 occurs in the context of leaving their homes but obviously is not meant in an absolute sense. It seems most likely that the disciples did leave the practice of their fishing businesses to follow Christ, but kept the tools of their trade and returned to their trades when necessary.<\/p>\n<p>They certainly did not abandon their families, as evidenced by Peter, who returned to his home at the end of each tour. The New Testament tells us that Peter was married. In Mark 1:29-31 Jesus heals his mother-in-law, who perhaps was living with Peter. In fact, it is possible that his home became Jesus’ headquarters in Galilee. (Matthew 8:14 may indicate that Jesus dwelt there.) First Corinthians 9:5 says that Peter, along with the other married apostles, often took his wife with him on his missionary journeys. Later tradition speaks of his children (Clement of Alexandria’s <em>Stromateis<\/em> 2.6.52) and says that Peter was present at the martyrdom of his wife (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 3.30.2).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersConversionandCall\">Peter’s Conversion and Call<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s brother, Andrew, was a disciple of John the Baptist, according to John 1:35-40. This follows the witness of John in 1:29-34 and is the second stage of John’s discipleship drama in chapter one—i.e., after bearing witness he now sends his own followers to Jesus. Andrew and the unnamed disciple (perhaps Philip as in Jn 1:43 or the “beloved disciple,” whom many identify with John himself) then “follow” Jesus (a term used often in John for discipleship). The next day Andrew follows the Baptist’s example and finds his brother Simon, saying, “We have found the Messiah” (Jn 1:41, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Peter’s conversion is presupposed in John 1:42, where Simon is brought to Jesus by Andrew and there given a new name.<\/p>\n<p>There are three separate episodes in the Gospels in which Simon is called, and these overlap with three episodes in which he is given the name “Cephas” (“Peter,” which means “rock”) by Jesus. John locates the event in Judea where John the Baptist was baptizing. The synoptic Gospels have two different scenes. The first call takes place at the Sea of Galilee (Mk 1:16-20; Mt 4:18-22). Jesus is walking along the shore and sees Peter and Andrew along with James and John casting their nets into the sea. At this time he calls them to become “fishers of men.” Luke then expands this into a fishing scene (Lk 5:1-11), in which the disciples have fished all night and caught nothing but at the command of Jesus lower their nets and catch an amount of fish so great that the boat starts to sink. The episode concludes exactly like the Markan abbreviated form: Jesus says that from now on they will “catch men,” and as a result they leave everything and follow him.<\/p>\n<p>The second synoptic episode involving Peter’s call (and his new name) is the official choice of the Twelve upon the mountain (Mk 3:13-19 and parallels); in the list of the names we have “Simon he surnamed Peter.” The final occurrence dealing with Peter’s new name is found in Matthew 16:17-19, in connection with Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi.<\/p>\n<p>It is somewhat difficult to harmonize these episodes properly. Were there three different episodes in which Simon was called (Jn 1:42; Mk 1:20; 3:16) and three separate incidents in which he was given the name Cephas\/Peter (Jn 1:42; Mk 3:16; Mt 16:18)? It is attractive to a broad spectrum of academia to assume that one single event, which happened at some indeterminate time toward the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, was later expanded into these diverse traditions. However, a closer examination of the Gospel data does not necessitate such a conclusion. John 1:35-42 is not an institutional scene that connotes an official call. Rather, it describes the first encounter with Jesus and realization regarding his significance. The “renaming” is in the future tense and looks to a later event. Moreover, John deliberately omits most of the crisis events in Jesus’ life (the baptism, the choice of the Twelve, the Transfiguration, the words of institution at the Last Supper, Gethsemane) and replaces them with highly theological scenes that teach the spiritual significance of the events. This is what he has done here.<\/p>\n<p>The same is true of the first synoptic call, i.e., the fishing scene. Again, there is no hint of official ordination to office here but rather a proleptic or prophetic hint of future ministry. This is especially true of the highly theological scene in Luke, which promises abundant results. Again in all three accounts the future tense is employed: “I will make you fishers of men” (Matthew and Mark), “You will catch men” (Luke, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The call in Mark 1:20 and Matthew 4:21 and their reaction (leaving all behind and following Jesus) is the opening gambit that is finalized in the actual institutional scene in Mark 3:13-19 and parallels. The wording does not indicate that these two episodes are doublets, for the actual appointment of the disciples occurs in the second passage. We must differentiate between the original call to one segment (who became the so-called “inner circle” of the Twelve) and the final choice of all the disciples.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersPlaceamongtheTwelve\">Peter’s Place among the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>The prominence of Simon Peter in the Gospels and Acts cannot be disputed. While some have attempted to attribute this to his leadership role in the later church, there is no basis for that in the text of the NT. From the very beginning Simon attained preeminence above the others. In the lists of the Twelve just mentioned, Simon’s name always appears first, and in Matthew 10:2 it introduces his name as “the first.” Moreover, the Twelve are often designated “Peter and those with him” (Mk 1:36; Lk 9:32; 8:45, <span>nkjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Throughout the accounts Peter acted and spoke on behalf of the other disciples. At the Transfiguration it is Peter who wanted to erect tents (Mk 9:5), and he alone had sufficient faith to attempt walking on the water (Mt 14:28-31). It is Peter who asks the Lord to explain his teaching on forgiveness (Mt 18:21) and parables (Mt 15:15; Lk 12:41) and who speaks the disciples’ minds in Matthew 19:27, “Behold, we have left everything and followed you; what’s in it for us?” (paraphrased). The collectors of the temple tax come to Peter as leader of the group (Mt 17:24). As a member of the inner circle (with James and John, possibly Andrew in Mk 13:3) he was often alone with Jesus (at the raising of Jairus’s daughter, Mk 5:37 and parallels; at the Transfiguration, Mk 9:2 and parallels; at Gethsemane, Mk 14:33 and Mt 26:37). Jesus asks Peter and John to prepare the Passover meal in Luke 22:8, and in Mark 14:37 (and Mt 26:40) he directs his rebuke to Peter as representing the others (“Could ye not watch with me one hour?”). Finally, the message of the angel at the tomb as recorded in Mark 16:7 said, “Go your way, tell his disciples and Peter.” Certainly Peter held a very special place among the Twelve.<\/p>\n<p>This was especially evident in the Caesarea Philippi episode (Mk 8:27-33 and parallels). It was Peter whose confession became the high point of the Gospel accounts, “Thou art the Christ” (Luke adds “of God”; Matthew, “the Son of the living God”). After Jesus then spoke of the suffering of the Son of Man, Peter rebuked him, and in Mark’s description Jesus then turned, gazed at all the disciples, and said to Peter, “Get thee behind me, Satan: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but the things that be of men” (v 33, <span>kjv<\/span>). This was obviously directed at them all through Peter.<\/p>\n<p>The portrait of Peter that comes through all four accounts pictures him as impulsive, often rash; he is the first to act and speak his mind and was typified by his enthusiasm for everything in which he had a part. At the sight of Jesus walking on the water, Peter asked that the Lord command him to do the same and then immediately leaped out of the boat and began doing just that. At the Transfiguration, while the others were awed into silence by the appearance of Moses and Elijah, Peter the man of action said, “If thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles” (Mt 17:4, <span>kjv<\/span>). Mark and Luke both add here that Peter did not know what he was saying. Peter’s unguarded and unthinking tendency to protest Jesus’ statements is seen not only at Caesarea Philippi but also at the foot-washing scene in John 13:4-11 when he said first, “You shall never ever wash my feet”; and then after Jesus’ strong retort, “If I do not wash you, you have no part with Me,” he reversed himself completely, stating, “Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and head” (13:8-9, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Finally, in the account of the race to the tomb (Jn 20:2-10), the beloved disciple, reaching the tomb first, paused while Peter immediately and impulsively entered it. Peter was certainly one who “rushed in where angels fear to tread.” However, this very trait aligns him with all of us and may be one of the major reasons why he becomes the representative disciple throughout the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetertheRock\">Peter the Rock<\/p>\n<p>The key to the significance of Simon Peter is obviously the controversial addendum to the Caesarea Philippi episode, found only in Matthew 16:17-19, Jesus’ testimonial to Peter. There are several crucial aspects of this saying. The most important for this study is verse 18, “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church” (<span>kjv<\/span>). There have been many interpretations of this down through history: (1) It refers to Peter as the “rock” or first bishop of the church. This was the Roman Catholic interpretation from the third century on and was employed as a prooftext for apostolic succession, but it is not hinted at anywhere in the context or even in the epistles: it was not a first-century concept. (2) The majority of Protestants since the Reformation have taken this to be a reference to Peter’s statement of faith rather than to Peter himself; but this neglects the wordplay, which is even more pronounced in Aramaic, which has only one form for “Cephas” (rock). (3) An alternative has been to take “this rock” as a reference to Jesus himself, but that is fanciful and is hardly in the context. In conclusion, “this rock” is almost certainly a reference to Peter, but it must be understood in two ways. First, Peter was to become the foundation upon which Christ would build his church, a position clearly attested to in Acts. This does not mean that Peter had an authority above the other apostles. Paul’s rebuke of Peter in Galatians 2:11-14 demonstrates that he was not above them, and at the Jerusalem council in Acts 15 it is James who has the position of leadership. Second, Peter is seen here not merely as an individual but as the representative of the disciples. This view is coming to increasing prominence today. It recognized the Jewish concept of “corporate identity” in which the leader was identified with the corporate body (e.g., the king or high priest representing the nation before God). This concept is also in keeping with Matthew 18:18-20, which passes on the same authority to the church as is here given to Peter. In this view Peter as the rock becomes the first of the building blocks upon which Christ, the chief cornerstone (to continue the metaphor), will build his church (see Eph 2:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>Two other aspects are worthy of note here. First, verse 18 says, “the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” The “gates of hell” is a common Jewish euphemism for death’s inevitable and irrevocable power. Jesus is saying that Satan will not be triumphant over the church, and his sphere of operations, death, will be defeated (cf. 1 Cor 15:26, 54-55). The church would undergo persecution and martyrdom, but the church would be triumphant.<\/p>\n<p>Second, verse 19 promises, “I will give unto thee [singular] the keys of the kingdom,” another statement used of apostolic succession by the medieval church. Again, this must be understood in light of corporate identity; Peter, as the preeminent figure in the early church, here embodies the community in his leadership. The “keys of the kingdom” are in direct contrast to the “gates of hell” (cf. Rv 1:18, “the keys of hell and death” and Rv 3:7, the “key of David”), and this follows the imagery of the building seen in the rock upon which Christ will build his church. Here Peter is given the keys that will unlock the power of the kingdom in building God’s community, the church. The future tense (“will give”) undoubtedly points to the postresurrection period, when that power was unleashed and the church erected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetertheApostle\">Peter the Apostle<\/p>\n<p>Two events led to the new Peter who fills the pages of Acts: his reinstatement described in John 21:15-17 and the resurrection appearance of the Lord, which is never described but alluded to in Luke 24:34 and 1 Corinthians 15:5. His denial was certainly proof that he was not yet able to assume his predicted position as the rock of the church. Both Luke and Paul seem to state that the risen Lord appeared to Simon Peter before the others, which would be fitting in light of his preeminence in the early church. During the Palestinian era, the fifteen-year period prior to the Gentile mission, Peter was the leading figure. The others mentioned in Acts 1–12 are all secondary to Peter, the dominant director of church policy. These include John, who is with Peter in the temple (3:1), the prison (4:13), and Samaria (8:14); Stephen, who was one of the Seven and whose revolutionary preaching led to his martyrdom (chs 6–7); Philip, another of the Seven who proclaimed the gospel in Samaria and to the Ethiopian eunuch (ch 8); Barnabas, who set an example of communal sharing (4:36-37) and was an official delegate to Antioch (11:20-30); Paul, a miraculous convert and witness (9:1-30; 11:25-30; 12:25); and James, who became the first apostolic martyr (12:2). It is Peter who proposes the choice of the 12th disciple (1:15-17), who proclaims the gospel at Pentecost (2:14-40), who utters the healing word (3:6), and who defends the gospel before the Sanhedrin (4:8-12, 19-20; 5:29-32). The episode regarding Ananias and Sapphira is particularly poignant, for here Peter functions as the avenging messenger of God; nowhere is his authority more evident. We would also note his authority in the scene at Samaria concerning the attempt of Simon the Sorcerer to buy the charismatic power (8:18-24). Again, it is Peter whose influence commands the situation. In these two incidents we certainly see the “binding and loosing” jurisdiction (cf. Mt 16:19) exhibited in Peter.<\/p>\n<p>Yet Peter and the church still came under the strictures of their Jewish heritage. The evidence points to a Jewish proselyte self-consciousness on the part of the early church. They viewed themselves as the righteous remnant, living in the age of Messianic fulfillment, but still interpreted themselves in a Jewish sense and conducted their evangelism in the proselyte form of Jewish particularism (i.e., Gentiles could only be converted through Judaism). Two events altered this. First, the Hellenistic Jewish branch of the church rebelled against the Hebrew Christians, which resulted in the appointment of the seven deacons and a change in the orthodox policy of the Palestinian church. Second, this then led to a new preaching ministry, first by Stephen, whose insights ended in his martyrdom and the dispersal of the Hellenistic branch in chapter 8; then by Philip and others, who extended the gospel even further, to the Samaritans and God-fearers. As a further result, Peter and John came to Samaria (8:14), the next significant step toward the Gentile mission. Thus ended the centrality of Jerusalem in the unfolding story.<\/p>\n<p>The two miracles of Peter, at Lydda (the paralytic) and Joppa (raising the dead woman) in Acts 9:32-42, are probably intended to parallel similar miracles of Jesus in Luke’s first work (Lk 5:18-26; 8:49-56). This is part of a major theme in Acts whereby Jesus’ life and ministry are paralleled and continued in the work of the Spirit through the church. Again Peter is seen in a representative role.<\/p>\n<p>The new relationships are extended in two further scenes. First, Peter stays with “Simon, a tanner,” in Joppa, an unclean trade; no pious Jew would knowingly have social contact with such a one. Even more important, God teaches Peter through a dream (10:10-16) that the old dichotomy between clean and unclean has been broken. This then leads Peter to the home of an uncircumcised Gentile, the most serious social taboo for the Jew, and subsequent events force Peter to admit Gentiles into the church without the necessity of Jewish proselyte requirements. The serious consequences of this are seen in the debate that ensued in Jerusalem (Acts 11:2-3) and later at the council (Acts 15:1-21). The centrality of this event is demonstrated in the extent to which Luke reproduces Peter’s speech, which seems to be a repetition of chapter 10 but is meant to highlight this crucial episode. Often forgotten in the significance of this for the early church is the fact that for Luke the Gentile mission begins with Peter, not Paul. He is the one upon whom the salvific act of God descends; and as the leader of the church, he was the first important witness to it.<\/p>\n<p>The persecution of Herod Agrippa (Acts 12:1-4) was likely due to the furor caused by this free intercourse with Gentiles; and it ended the period of Peter’s leadership in Jerusalem. The Jewish people were greatly offended by the new Christian push; and according to Luke in Acts, the idyllic period of popularity, in which the common people supported the church, effectively ceased at this time. Peter’s miraculous release and the dramatic scene at Mary’s house typified the special place of Peter, but the momentum shifts. Peter is forced to flee Jerusalem, and in the interim James arises to leadership (Acts 12:17); at the Jerusalem council it is the latter who has the chair and presents the council’s decision (Acts 15:6-29).<\/p>\n<p>The exact relationship between Peter and the other disciples, especially with the so-called pillars—James and John—and the apostle Paul, cannot be ascertained. The evidence is too vague. Many have thought that indeed there were no truly universal leaders, for the early church was too diverse. However, that is unlikely, and Luke’s portrayal in Acts parallels Paul’s statement in Galatians 2:8 that Peter was the apostle par excellence to the “circumcised” and Paul to the “Gentiles.” They were the universal leaders, while James became the local leader of the Jerusalem eldership. However, neither Peter nor Paul had dominical status similar to that of later popes (i.e., neither was the absolute spokesman of the church and above criticism). So-called emissaries from James could have such an influence on Peter that he would hypocritically change his behavior before Gentiles (Gal 2:12), and Paul could rebuke Peter publicly for doing so (Gal 2:11-14). Paul never claimed authority over the other disciples and even sought their approval and “the right hands of fellowship” for his ministry to the Gentiles (Gal 2:1-10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersFutureMinistry\">Peter’s Future Ministry<\/p>\n<p>We have very little hard evidence for Peter’s other movements. It seems as though Peter gradually turned from leadership to missionary work. However, this is an oversimplification. It is most likely that, following the similar pattern of Paul, he combined the two. The presence of a “Cephas party” at Corinth (1 Cor 1:12; 3:22) may indicate that Peter had spent some time there. This is made even more likely when Paul uses Peter as the main example for taking one’s wife on missionary expeditions (1 Cor 9:5). The “Cephas party” probably consisted of those who were converted under his ministry; it is probable that they were Jewish Christians and opposed the “Paul party” on Jewish-Gentile debates reflected elsewhere in 1 Corinthians.<\/p>\n<p>The First Epistle of Peter was sent to churches in northern Asia Minor—the provinces of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia. The problem here is that there is no hint that Peter had been there and no personal notations in the epistle to demonstrate his acquaintance with these churches. However, it does show that he was very interested in them. In fact, some believe that the reason why Paul was not allowed into this district according to Acts 16:7-8 was that Peter was already ministering there. In short, the question of Peter’s involvement in Asia Minor must remain an open one.<\/p>\n<p>There is no final NT evidence that Peter went to Rome. First Peter 5:13 says that the epistle was sent from “Babylon,” and it is doubtful that this was the literal Babylon, because there is no tradition that Peter ever went there, and Babylon was sparsely populated back then. It is probably a cryptic symbol for Rome, the “Babylon of the West.” It is most likely that the “Babylon” of Revelation 14:8 and 16:19 is also a symbol of Rome. This would fit the strong tradition in the early church that indeed Peter did minister there.<\/p>\n<p>There are four early external witnesses concerning Peter’s death. John 21:18 mentions only the martyrdom of Peter but does not give any hint as to the place. First Clement was written at the end of the first century and reports the martyrdom of Peter and Paul among others. While 1 Clement 5:4 testifies only to the fact and not the place of Peter’s martyrdom, a study of two aspects favors Rome—the reference to a “great multitude” of martyrdoms, which best fits the Neronian persecution, and the phrase “glorious example among us,” which shows that the people of Clement’s own church (Rome) were involved. Ignatius’s letter to the Romans (4:3) also testifies generally to the martyrdom of Peter and Paul, and again the context favors Rome as the place. He says, “I did not command you as did Peter and Paul,” which shows that they had ministries in Rome. The Ascension of Isaiah 4:2-3, a Jewish Christian work of the same period, speaks of Beliar (probably Nero) who martyrs “one of the Twelve,” almost certainly Peter. Therefore the earliest evidence does not explicitly point to Rome as the place of Peter’s death, but that is the most likely hypothesis.<\/p>\n<p>Definite statements to that effect appear toward the end of the second century. Dionysius, bishop of Corinth, in a letter dated c. 170 (preserved in Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 2.25.8) says that Peter and Paul taught together in Italy. At the end of that century Irenaeus says (in <em>Against Heresies<\/em> 2.1-3) that Peter and Paul preached in Rome, and Tertullian in the same general period adds that Peter was martyred “like . . . the Lord” (<em>Scorpiace<\/em> 15). Clement of Alexandria and Origen both allude to Peter’s presence in Rome, and the latter adds the belief that he was “crucified head-downwards” (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 2.15.2; 3.1.2). The tradition that Peter was crucified may be supported in John 21:18: “when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall . . . carry thee wither thou wouldest not” (<span>kjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The fact that Paul’s Epistle to the Romans (c. 55–57) does not mention Peter tells us that he could not have gone there earlier than that. If 1 Peter was written during the Neronian persecution, as those who hold to Petrine authorship believe, he must have gone there sometime in the late 50s or early 60s. Of course, the extent of his ministry in Rome also cannot be known. Some indeed have posited that he had little or no extensive stay in Rome. The facts, as they can be recovered, point to certain tentative conclusions. Peter did have some type of ministry in Rome, though the extent of it cannot be known. However, it is doubtful, in light of the early testimony to his preaching ministry there, that he was merely passing through Rome when caught in Nero’s pogrom. Therefore he most likely spent the last years of his ministry in Rome and there suffered martyrdom under Nero, perhaps by crucifixion.<\/p>\n<p>Simon Peter, along with Paul, was the leading figure in the early church. His impact has been tragically dimmed by the acrimonious debates of Roman Catholic– Protestant circles, but the biblical evidence is clear. He was the leading disciple of Jesus and indeed the “rock” who provided the foundation for the church. As the representative disciple, his enthusiasm and even his weaknesses have made him the supreme example of the developing disciple, one who, through the power of the risen Lord, rose above his faults to become a towering figure on the church scene.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PETER, The Apostle One of the 12 disciples; rose to prominence both among the disciples during Jesus’ ministry and among the apostles afterwards. There are actually four forms of Peter’s name in the New Testament: the Hebrew translated into Greek, “Simeon” to “Simon,” and the Aramaic translated into Greek, “Cephas” to “Petros” (meaning “rock”). His given name was Simeon bar-Jonah (Mt 16:17; cf. Jn 1:42), “Simon the son of John,” which was common Semitic nomenclature. It is most likely that “S...","summary_en":"PETER, The Apostle One of the 12 disciples; rose to prominence both among the disciples during Jesus’ ministry and among the apostles afterwards. There are actually four forms of Peter’s name in the New Testament: the Hebrew translated into Greek, “Simeon” to “Simon,” and the Aramaic translated into Greek, “Cephas” to “Petros” (meaning “rock”). His given name was Simeon bar-Jonah (Mt 16:17; cf. Jn 1:42), “Simon the son of John,” which was common Semitic nomenclature. It is most likely that “S...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":30177,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Philip","title_en":"Philip","content_ro":"<h3>PHILIP<\/h3>\n<li>1. Apostle whose name is placed fifth in each of the lists of the twelve after the two pairs of brothers, Simon Peter and Andrew, and James and John (Mt 10:3; Mk 3:18; Lk 6:14). John says that when John the Baptist bore witness to Jesus with the words, “Behold, the Lamb of God!” two of his disciples began to follow Jesus, and that one of these two was Andrew, who then declared to his brother Simon Peter, “We have found the Messiah,” and brought him to Jesus. (The other unnamed disciple was quite probably John himself, the writer of this account.) On the next day Jesus went to Galilee and there found Philip and addressed the call to him: “Follow me.” John adds that Philip was from Bethsaida. Philip in turn found Nathanael and told him, “We have found him of whom Moses in the law and also the prophets wrote,” and invited Nathanael, who was skeptical that any good could come out of Nazareth, to come and see for himself (Jn 1:35-51, <span>rsv<\/span>). From this is concluded that Philip was one of the first to follow Jesus and that he lost no time in persuading others to do the same.<\/li>\n<p>Like the other apostles, however, he still had much to learn about the person and the power of Christ. Hence, the testing question of Jesus to him on the occasion of the feeding of the 5,000, “How are we to buy bread, so that these people may eat?” and Philip’s puzzled response that even if they had 200 denarii (i.e., a large sum, roughly a person’s wages for half a year), it would not buy enough bread for each one to be given just a little to eat (Jn 6:5-7). The miracle that followed taught him that the feeding of this multitude presented no problem to the one who is the Lord of all creation. Philip’s next appearance is in Jerusalem after Christ’s triumphal entry into the city, when “some Greeks” (i.e., Greek-speaking non-Jews) approached him with the request “Sir, we wish to see Jesus.” Philip informs Andrew, and together they bring them to Jesus (12:20-22). This perhaps indicates that Philip was a person whom others found readily approachable, and also that he spoke Greek. In the upper room, prior to his arrest and trial, Jesus took the opportunity to impart further instruction to Philip, who had said, “Lord, show us the Father, and we shall be satisfied.” Philip hoped perhaps, in all devoutness, for the privilege of some special revelation (reminiscent of the request of Moses, Ex 33:18). But Jesus taught him that he himself, the incarnate Son, is the all-sufficient revelation of the Father to humanity (Jn 14:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>There is a tendency to confuse the apostle with the evangelist (see below) of the same name. It seems probable, however, that after preaching in various parts, the apostle settled in Hierapolis, a city of the Roman province of Asia, and died there. Whether his was a natural or a martyr’s death is uncertain.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Apostle, Apostleship.<\/p>\n<li>2. Hellenistic Jew and one of the seven men appointed by the church in Jerusalem to supervise the daily ministry of assistance to the impoverished widows of the Christian community. They all, including Philip, had Greek names, and one of them, Nicolaus, was a proselyte (i.e., not a Jew by birth). Whether or not they were regarded as deacons in the technical sense is not absolutely clear from the account; this occasion has, however, been generally accepted as the origin of the order of the diaconate (Acts 6:1-7). Of the seven, Stephen and Philip are the only ones of whom we have any further record in the NT. They are described as men of good repute, full of the Spirit and of wisdom (v 3).<\/li>\n<p>That Philip became known as “the evangelist” is apparent from Acts 21:8. The designation was well deserved, for when the Jerusalem Christians were scattered by the persecution led by Saul of Tarsus, Philip went to a city of Samaria and proclaimed the gospel with such power there that a great number of people joyfully turned to Christ (Acts 8:1-8). In the midst of this spectacular work, Philip was divinely instructed to leave Samaria and go down to the desert area in the southern part of the country. Humanly speaking, for him to turn away from the multitudes, who were so eagerly responding to his preaching and to go to the uninhabited territory in the south, must have seemed foolish. Yet Philip showed himself not only sensitive but also obedient to the will of God and followed this guidance without question. In the desert he found not a crowd but a single person, an important Ethiopian court official who had visited Jerusalem and was now returning to Africa. The wisdom of God in directing Philip to this place was fully vindicated, for the Ethiopian was reading Isaiah 53, the great gospel chapter of the OT. Philip gave him the good news that this prophecy pointed to Jesus Christ. The Ethiopian subsequently believed and was baptized and went on his way rejoicing (vv 25-40). The conversion of this one person meant not only that Philip was the first to proclaim the gospel to a Gentile but also that the gospel was taken by this Ethiopian courtier to the continent of Africa.<\/p>\n<p>The prevailing nationalistic pride of the Jews was such that they despised the Samaritans and regarded the Gentiles as ceremonially unclean. But Philip, by his eager preaching of Christ first to the Samaritans and then to the Ethiopian, reflected the way in which the gospel penetrated social barriers and dissolved racial prejudices and demonstrated that the grace of God in Christ Jesus is freely available to all. Subsequently, Philip made his home in the coastal town of Caesarea. There he hospitably entertained Paul and Luke when they were en route to Jerusalem at the conclusion of the apostle’s third missionary journey. Luke tells us that Philip had four unmarried daughters who were prophetesses (Acts 21:8-9). Not long after this, when Paul was in custody in Caesarea for two years, the kindness and friendship of Philip must have meant much to him (23:31-35; 24:23, 27).<\/p>\n<li>3. Son of Herod the Great and Cleopatra and half brother of Antipas, whose mother was Malthace. He is called Herod in Luke 3:1. The latter was tetrarch of Perea and Galilee from 4 <span>BC<\/span> to <span>AD<\/span> 39; Philip was tetrarch of Iturea and Trachonitis (plus certain other territories) to the northeast of Galilee for 37 years (4 <span>BC<\/span> to <span>AD<\/span> 33). His wife was his niece Salome, who danced for Herod in exchange for the head of John the Baptist (Mt 14:3-12; Mk 6:17-29).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Herod, Herodian Family.<\/p>\n<li>4. Son of Herod the Great and Mariamne and husband of Salome’s mother, Herodias, who left him to become the mistress of his half brother Herod Antipas. It was for this immoral relationship that John the Baptist rebuked Herod and was later imprisoned and beheaded (Mt 14:3-12; Mk 6:17-29; Lk 3:19-20).<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>PHILIP<\/h3>\n<li>1. Apostle whose name is placed fifth in each of the lists of the twelve after the two pairs of brothers, Simon Peter and Andrew, and James and John (Mt 10:3; Mk 3:18; Lk 6:14). John says that when John the Baptist bore witness to Jesus with the words, “Behold, the Lamb of God!” two of his disciples began to follow Jesus, and that one of these two was Andrew, who then declared to his brother Simon Peter, “We have found the Messiah,” and brought him to Jesus. (The other unnamed disciple was quite probably John himself, the writer of this account.) On the next day Jesus went to Galilee and there found Philip and addressed the call to him: “Follow me.” John adds that Philip was from Bethsaida. Philip in turn found Nathanael and told him, “We have found him of whom Moses in the law and also the prophets wrote,” and invited Nathanael, who was skeptical that any good could come out of Nazareth, to come and see for himself (Jn 1:35-51, <span>rsv<\/span>). From this is concluded that Philip was one of the first to follow Jesus and that he lost no time in persuading others to do the same.<\/li>\n<p>Like the other apostles, however, he still had much to learn about the person and the power of Christ. Hence, the testing question of Jesus to him on the occasion of the feeding of the 5,000, “How are we to buy bread, so that these people may eat?” and Philip’s puzzled response that even if they had 200 denarii (i.e., a large sum, roughly a person’s wages for half a year), it would not buy enough bread for each one to be given just a little to eat (Jn 6:5-7). The miracle that followed taught him that the feeding of this multitude presented no problem to the one who is the Lord of all creation. Philip’s next appearance is in Jerusalem after Christ’s triumphal entry into the city, when “some Greeks” (i.e., Greek-speaking non-Jews) approached him with the request “Sir, we wish to see Jesus.” Philip informs Andrew, and together they bring them to Jesus (12:20-22). This perhaps indicates that Philip was a person whom others found readily approachable, and also that he spoke Greek. In the upper room, prior to his arrest and trial, Jesus took the opportunity to impart further instruction to Philip, who had said, “Lord, show us the Father, and we shall be satisfied.” Philip hoped perhaps, in all devoutness, for the privilege of some special revelation (reminiscent of the request of Moses, Ex 33:18). But Jesus taught him that he himself, the incarnate Son, is the all-sufficient revelation of the Father to humanity (Jn 14:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>There is a tendency to confuse the apostle with the evangelist (see below) of the same name. It seems probable, however, that after preaching in various parts, the apostle settled in Hierapolis, a city of the Roman province of Asia, and died there. Whether his was a natural or a martyr’s death is uncertain.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Apostle, Apostleship.<\/p>\n<li>2. Hellenistic Jew and one of the seven men appointed by the church in Jerusalem to supervise the daily ministry of assistance to the impoverished widows of the Christian community. They all, including Philip, had Greek names, and one of them, Nicolaus, was a proselyte (i.e., not a Jew by birth). Whether or not they were regarded as deacons in the technical sense is not absolutely clear from the account; this occasion has, however, been generally accepted as the origin of the order of the diaconate (Acts 6:1-7). Of the seven, Stephen and Philip are the only ones of whom we have any further record in the NT. They are described as men of good repute, full of the Spirit and of wisdom (v 3).<\/li>\n<p>That Philip became known as “the evangelist” is apparent from Acts 21:8. The designation was well deserved, for when the Jerusalem Christians were scattered by the persecution led by Saul of Tarsus, Philip went to a city of Samaria and proclaimed the gospel with such power there that a great number of people joyfully turned to Christ (Acts 8:1-8). In the midst of this spectacular work, Philip was divinely instructed to leave Samaria and go down to the desert area in the southern part of the country. Humanly speaking, for him to turn away from the multitudes, who were so eagerly responding to his preaching and to go to the uninhabited territory in the south, must have seemed foolish. Yet Philip showed himself not only sensitive but also obedient to the will of God and followed this guidance without question. In the desert he found not a crowd but a single person, an important Ethiopian court official who had visited Jerusalem and was now returning to Africa. The wisdom of God in directing Philip to this place was fully vindicated, for the Ethiopian was reading Isaiah 53, the great gospel chapter of the OT. Philip gave him the good news that this prophecy pointed to Jesus Christ. The Ethiopian subsequently believed and was baptized and went on his way rejoicing (vv 25-40). The conversion of this one person meant not only that Philip was the first to proclaim the gospel to a Gentile but also that the gospel was taken by this Ethiopian courtier to the continent of Africa.<\/p>\n<p>The prevailing nationalistic pride of the Jews was such that they despised the Samaritans and regarded the Gentiles as ceremonially unclean. But Philip, by his eager preaching of Christ first to the Samaritans and then to the Ethiopian, reflected the way in which the gospel penetrated social barriers and dissolved racial prejudices and demonstrated that the grace of God in Christ Jesus is freely available to all. Subsequently, Philip made his home in the coastal town of Caesarea. There he hospitably entertained Paul and Luke when they were en route to Jerusalem at the conclusion of the apostle’s third missionary journey. Luke tells us that Philip had four unmarried daughters who were prophetesses (Acts 21:8-9). Not long after this, when Paul was in custody in Caesarea for two years, the kindness and friendship of Philip must have meant much to him (23:31-35; 24:23, 27).<\/p>\n<li>3. Son of Herod the Great and Cleopatra and half brother of Antipas, whose mother was Malthace. He is called Herod in Luke 3:1. The latter was tetrarch of Perea and Galilee from 4 <span>BC<\/span> to <span>AD<\/span> 39; Philip was tetrarch of Iturea and Trachonitis (plus certain other territories) to the northeast of Galilee for 37 years (4 <span>BC<\/span> to <span>AD<\/span> 33). His wife was his niece Salome, who danced for Herod in exchange for the head of John the Baptist (Mt 14:3-12; Mk 6:17-29).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Herod, Herodian Family.<\/p>\n<li>4. Son of Herod the Great and Mariamne and husband of Salome’s mother, Herodias, who left him to become the mistress of his half brother Herod Antipas. It was for this immoral relationship that John the Baptist rebuked Herod and was later imprisoned and beheaded (Mt 14:3-12; Mk 6:17-29; Lk 3:19-20).<\/li>","summary_ro":"PHILIP 1. Apostle whose name is placed fifth in each of the lists of the twelve after the two pairs of brothers, Simon Peter and Andrew, and James and John (Mt 10:3; Mk 3:18; Lk 6:14). John says that when John the Baptist bore witness to Jesus with the words, “Behold, the Lamb of God!” two of his disciples began to follow Jesus, and that one of these two was Andrew, who then declared to his brother Simon Peter, “We have found the Messiah,” and brought him to Jesus. (The other unnamed disciple...","summary_en":"PHILIP 1. Apostle whose name is placed fifth in each of the lists of the twelve after the two pairs of brothers, Simon Peter and Andrew, and James and John (Mt 10:3; Mk 3:18; Lk 6:14). John says that when John the Baptist bore witness to Jesus with the words, “Behold, the Lamb of God!” two of his disciples began to follow Jesus, and that one of these two was Andrew, who then declared to his brother Simon Peter, “We have found the Messiah,” and brought him to Jesus. (The other unnamed disciple...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56331,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:35","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:35","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:35-51<\/strong> This section introduces the template for discipleship in John’s Gospel. Disciples desired to <em>come and see<\/em> Jesus (1:39), and when they encountered him, they <em>remained<\/em> with him.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:35-51<\/strong> This section introduces the template for discipleship in John’s Gospel. Disciples desired to <em>come and see<\/em> Jesus (1:39), and when they encountered him, they <em>remained<\/em> with him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:35-51 This section introduces the template for discipleship in John’s Gospel. Disciples desired to come and see Jesus (1:39), and when they encountered him, they remained with him.","summary_en":"1:35-51 This section introduces the template for discipleship in John’s Gospel. Disciples desired to come and see Jesus (1:39), and when they encountered him, they remained with him.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83957,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:35","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:35","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:35-51<\/strong> This section introduces the template for discipleship in John’s Gospel. Disciples desired to <em>come and see<\/em> Jesus (1:39), and when they encountered him, they <em>remained<\/em> with him.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:35-51<\/strong> This section introduces the template for discipleship in John’s Gospel. Disciples desired to <em>come and see<\/em> Jesus (1:39), and when they encountered him, they <em>remained<\/em> with him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:35-51 This section introduces the template for discipleship in John’s Gospel. Disciples desired to come and see Jesus (1:39), and when they encountered him, they remained with him.","summary_en":"1:35-51 This section introduces the template for discipleship in John’s Gospel. Disciples desired to come and see Jesus (1:39), and when they encountered him, they remained with him.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111583,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:35","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:35","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:35-51<\/strong> This section introduces the template for discipleship in John’s Gospel. Disciples desired to <em>come and see<\/em> Jesus (1:39), and when they encountered him, they <em>remained<\/em> with him.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:35-51<\/strong> This section introduces the template for discipleship in John’s Gospel. Disciples desired to <em>come and see<\/em> Jesus (1:39), and when they encountered him, they <em>remained<\/em> with him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:35-51 This section introduces the template for discipleship in John’s Gospel. Disciples desired to come and see Jesus (1:39), and when they encountered him, they remained with him.","summary_en":"1:35-51 This section introduces the template for discipleship in John’s Gospel. Disciples desired to come and see Jesus (1:39), and when they encountered him, they remained with him.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139209,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:35","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:35","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:35-51<\/strong> This section introduces the template for discipleship in John’s Gospel. Disciples desired to <em>come and see<\/em> Jesus (1:39), and when they encountered him, they <em>remained<\/em> with him.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:35-51<\/strong> This section introduces the template for discipleship in John’s Gospel. Disciples desired to <em>come and see<\/em> Jesus (1:39), and when they encountered him, they <em>remained<\/em> with him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:35-51 This section introduces the template for discipleship in John’s Gospel. Disciples desired to come and see Jesus (1:39), and when they encountered him, they remained with him.","summary_en":"1:35-51 This section introduces the template for discipleship in John’s Gospel. Disciples desired to come and see Jesus (1:39), and when they encountered him, they remained with him.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"36":[{"id":1582,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Andrew, the Apostle","title_en":"Andrew, the Apostle","content_ro":"<h3>ANDREW, T<span>he<\/span> A<span>postle<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>One of Christ’s 12 apostles. Andrew first appears in the NT as a disciple of John the Baptist (Jn 1:35, 40). After hearing John say, “Look, there is the Lamb of God!” (Jn 1:36), referring to Jesus, Andrew and another unnamed disciple followed Jesus and stayed with him for a day (Jn 1:36-39). Andrew then told his brother, Simon Peter, that he had found the Messiah and brought Peter to Jesus (Jn 1:40-42). From then on Andrew faded into the background, and his brother came into prominence. Whenever the relationship of the two is mentioned, Andrew is always described as the brother of Simon Peter and never the other way around (Mt 4:18; Mk 1:16; Jn 1:40; 6:8), although Andrew is also mentioned without reference to his relationship to Peter (Mk 1:29; 3:18; 13:3; Jn 12:22). Andrew’s father was John (Mt 16:17; Jn 1:42; 21:15-17), and his hometown was Bethsaida (Jn 1:44), a village on the north shore of the Sea of Galilee.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John mentions disciples being with Jesus (2:2; 4:2), and it is likely that Andrew was one of that early group. Evidently, however, he returned to his activity as a fisherman on the Sea of Galilee, where he shared a house with Peter and his family in Capernaum (Mt 4:18-20; Mk 1:16-18, 29-33). While they were fishing, Andrew and Peter received a definite call to follow Jesus and become those who fish for people. From among the disciples of Jesus a group of 12 were later specially chosen as apostles. Andrew is always listed among the first four named, along with Peter and two other brothers, John and James (Mt 10:2-4; Lk 6:13-16; Acts 1:13).<\/p>\n<p>Andrew is named in only three other contexts in the Gospels. At the feeding of the 5,000 he called attention to the boy who had five barley loaves and two fish (Jn 6:8-9). When certain Greeks came to Philip, asking to see Jesus, Philip told Andrew and then the two of them told Jesus (Jn 12:20-22). Finally, Andrew is listed among those who were questioning Jesus privately on the Mt of Olives (Mk 13:3-4). The last NT mention of Andrew is in the list of apostles waiting in the upper room in Jerusalem for the promised outpouring of the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:12-14).<\/p>\n<p>Various documents associated with Andrew, such as the Acts of Andrew mentioned by the early church historian Eusebius, are of doubtful value. Some traditions indicate that Andrew ministered in Scythia. According to the Muratorian Canon, Andrew received a revelation at night that the apostle John should write the fourth Gospel. Tradition is rather uniform that Andrew died at Patrae in Achaia. A story developed that he was martyred on an X-shaped cross (a “decussate” or “saltire” cross), which has become known as St Andrew’s Cross. Another tradition is that an arm of the dead Andrew was taken into Scotland as a relic by Regulus, and thus Andrew became known as a patron saint of Scotland. On the calendar of saints of the Roman and Greek churches, Andrew’s date is set as November 30. <em>See<\/em> Apocrypha (Specific Titles of Apocryphal Writings): Andrew, Acts of; Andrew, Story of; Andrew and Matthias, Acts of; Andrew and Paul, Acts of.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Apostle, Apostleship.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ANDREW, T<span>he<\/span> A<span>postle<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>One of Christ’s 12 apostles. Andrew first appears in the NT as a disciple of John the Baptist (Jn 1:35, 40). After hearing John say, “Look, there is the Lamb of God!” (Jn 1:36), referring to Jesus, Andrew and another unnamed disciple followed Jesus and stayed with him for a day (Jn 1:36-39). Andrew then told his brother, Simon Peter, that he had found the Messiah and brought Peter to Jesus (Jn 1:40-42). From then on Andrew faded into the background, and his brother came into prominence. Whenever the relationship of the two is mentioned, Andrew is always described as the brother of Simon Peter and never the other way around (Mt 4:18; Mk 1:16; Jn 1:40; 6:8), although Andrew is also mentioned without reference to his relationship to Peter (Mk 1:29; 3:18; 13:3; Jn 12:22). Andrew’s father was John (Mt 16:17; Jn 1:42; 21:15-17), and his hometown was Bethsaida (Jn 1:44), a village on the north shore of the Sea of Galilee.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John mentions disciples being with Jesus (2:2; 4:2), and it is likely that Andrew was one of that early group. Evidently, however, he returned to his activity as a fisherman on the Sea of Galilee, where he shared a house with Peter and his family in Capernaum (Mt 4:18-20; Mk 1:16-18, 29-33). While they were fishing, Andrew and Peter received a definite call to follow Jesus and become those who fish for people. From among the disciples of Jesus a group of 12 were later specially chosen as apostles. Andrew is always listed among the first four named, along with Peter and two other brothers, John and James (Mt 10:2-4; Lk 6:13-16; Acts 1:13).<\/p>\n<p>Andrew is named in only three other contexts in the Gospels. At the feeding of the 5,000 he called attention to the boy who had five barley loaves and two fish (Jn 6:8-9). When certain Greeks came to Philip, asking to see Jesus, Philip told Andrew and then the two of them told Jesus (Jn 12:20-22). Finally, Andrew is listed among those who were questioning Jesus privately on the Mt of Olives (Mk 13:3-4). The last NT mention of Andrew is in the list of apostles waiting in the upper room in Jerusalem for the promised outpouring of the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:12-14).<\/p>\n<p>Various documents associated with Andrew, such as the Acts of Andrew mentioned by the early church historian Eusebius, are of doubtful value. Some traditions indicate that Andrew ministered in Scythia. According to the Muratorian Canon, Andrew received a revelation at night that the apostle John should write the fourth Gospel. Tradition is rather uniform that Andrew died at Patrae in Achaia. A story developed that he was martyred on an X-shaped cross (a “decussate” or “saltire” cross), which has become known as St Andrew’s Cross. Another tradition is that an arm of the dead Andrew was taken into Scotland as a relic by Regulus, and thus Andrew became known as a patron saint of Scotland. On the calendar of saints of the Roman and Greek churches, Andrew’s date is set as November 30. <em>See<\/em> Apocrypha (Specific Titles of Apocryphal Writings): Andrew, Acts of; Andrew, Story of; Andrew and Matthias, Acts of; Andrew and Paul, Acts of.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Apostle, Apostleship.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ANDREW, The Apostle One of Christ’s 12 apostles. Andrew first appears in the NT as a disciple of John the Baptist (Jn 1:35, 40). After hearing John say, “Look, there is the Lamb of God!” (Jn 1:36), referring to Jesus, Andrew and another unnamed disciple followed Jesus and stayed with him for a day (Jn 1:36-39). Andrew then told his brother, Simon Peter, that he had found the Messiah and brought Peter to Jesus (Jn 1:40-42). From then on Andrew faded into the background, and his brother came in...","summary_en":"ANDREW, The Apostle One of Christ’s 12 apostles. Andrew first appears in the NT as a disciple of John the Baptist (Jn 1:35, 40). After hearing John say, “Look, there is the Lamb of God!” (Jn 1:36), referring to Jesus, Andrew and another unnamed disciple followed Jesus and stayed with him for a day (Jn 1:36-39). Andrew then told his brother, Simon Peter, that he had found the Messiah and brought Peter to Jesus (Jn 1:40-42). From then on Andrew faded into the background, and his brother came in...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":5493,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Bone","title_en":"Bone","content_ro":"<h3>BONE<\/h3>\n<p>One of the separate parts of the human or animal skeleton. After death, bones retain their form long after the soft tissues have decomposed, so bones are often associated with dead bodies or with death itself. The Israelites were concerned about proper respect for the bodies of the dead (Gn 50:25; 1 Sm 31:11-13; 2 Kgs 23:14-18; Ez 39:14-16; Am 2:1; Heb 11:22).<\/p>\n<p>A valley of “old, dry bones” symbolized the people of Israel, who were without hope until the Spirit of the Lord would put life back into them (Ez 37:1-14). In a living body, however, bones are living tissue, and Ezekiel knew that broken bones could heal (30:21). Intact bones were a requirement for an unblemished lamb for the Passover (Ex 12:46; Nm 9:11-12). Thus, the NT states that when Jesus Christ, the “Lamb of God” (Jn 1:36), was crucified, contrary to Roman practice, his legs were not broken (Ps 34:20; Jn 19:30-37).<\/p>\n<p>Some references to bones in the Bible (Jb 2:5; 19:20; 30:30) carry the connotation of deep feelings, as in the phrase “I feel it in my bones.” Other references are metaphorical expressions of close kinship, “flesh and bone” (Gn 2:23; 29:14; Jgs 9:2) being equivalent to the expression “one’s own flesh and blood.”<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BONE<\/h3>\n<p>One of the separate parts of the human or animal skeleton. After death, bones retain their form long after the soft tissues have decomposed, so bones are often associated with dead bodies or with death itself. The Israelites were concerned about proper respect for the bodies of the dead (Gn 50:25; 1 Sm 31:11-13; 2 Kgs 23:14-18; Ez 39:14-16; Am 2:1; Heb 11:22).<\/p>\n<p>A valley of “old, dry bones” symbolized the people of Israel, who were without hope until the Spirit of the Lord would put life back into them (Ez 37:1-14). In a living body, however, bones are living tissue, and Ezekiel knew that broken bones could heal (30:21). Intact bones were a requirement for an unblemished lamb for the Passover (Ex 12:46; Nm 9:11-12). Thus, the NT states that when Jesus Christ, the “Lamb of God” (Jn 1:36), was crucified, contrary to Roman practice, his legs were not broken (Ps 34:20; Jn 19:30-37).<\/p>\n<p>Some references to bones in the Bible (Jb 2:5; 19:20; 30:30) carry the connotation of deep feelings, as in the phrase “I feel it in my bones.” Other references are metaphorical expressions of close kinship, “flesh and bone” (Gn 2:23; 29:14; Jgs 9:2) being equivalent to the expression “one’s own flesh and blood.”<\/p>","summary_ro":"BONE One of the separate parts of the human or animal skeleton. After death, bones retain their form long after the soft tissues have decomposed, so bones are often associated with dead bodies or with death itself. The Israelites were concerned about proper respect for the bodies of the dead (Gn 50:25; 1 Sm 31:11-13; 2 Kgs 23:14-18; Ez 39:14-16; Am 2:1; Heb 11:22). A valley of “old, dry bones” symbolized the people of Israel, who were without hope until the Spirit of the Lord would put life b...","summary_en":"BONE One of the separate parts of the human or animal skeleton. After death, bones retain their form long after the soft tissues have decomposed, so bones are often associated with dead bodies or with death itself. The Israelites were concerned about proper respect for the bodies of the dead (Gn 50:25; 1 Sm 31:11-13; 2 Kgs 23:14-18; Ez 39:14-16; Am 2:1; Heb 11:22). A valley of “old, dry bones” symbolized the people of Israel, who were without hope until the Spirit of the Lord would put life b...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65933,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","title_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","content_ro":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","summary_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66083,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Cross and Passover","title_en":"The Cross and Passover","content_ro":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","summary_en":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93559,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","title_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","content_ro":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","summary_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93709,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Cross and Passover","title_en":"The Cross and Passover","content_ro":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","summary_en":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121185,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","title_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","content_ro":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","summary_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121335,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Cross and Passover","title_en":"The Cross and Passover","content_ro":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","summary_en":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148811,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","title_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","content_ro":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","summary_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148961,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Cross and Passover","title_en":"The Cross and Passover","content_ro":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","summary_en":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"37":[{"id":20401,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>JOHN THE BAPTIST<\/h3>\n<p>Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29, while Jesus was still ministering.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>• Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>• John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>• Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>• The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BirthInfancyandBoyhood\">Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s Gospel is our only source of information concerning the birth and boyhood of John. The Gospel writer states that John was born in the hill country of Judah (Lk 1:39) of priestly descent, being the son of Zechariah, a priest of the order of Abijah, and Elizabeth, a descendant of Aaron (v 5). Both parents were righteous in the sight of God, following all the commandments closely (v 6). Like the birth of Jesus, only to a much lesser degree, the birth of John the Baptist is described in Luke as extraordinary. The angel Gabriel announced the coming birth to Zechariah in the temple; to the older, barren Elizabeth it came as an answer to prayer (vv 8-13). John’s name is announced to Zechariah by the angel, even as his purpose as forerunner is revealed before birth (vv 13-17). Such a consecration from birth is reminiscent of the call of the OT prophet Jeremiah (cf. Jer 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>There existed some familial relationship between the families of John and Jesus. Elizabeth is described as a relative of Mary (Lk 1:36), which may connote cousin or aunt, or may only mean being from the same tribe.<\/p>\n<p>John’s childhood, as that of Jesus, is left quite vague in the Gospel account. All that is said is that “John grew up and became strong in spirit. Then he lived out in the wilderness until he began his public ministry to Israel” (Lk 1:80, <span>nlt<\/span>). Some scholars have suggested that John might have been adopted as a boy by the Essenes (as was their practice) at Qumran and reared in their wilderness community, adjacent to the Dead Sea and near the Jordan River. There are some similarities between the activities of the Qumran sect, known through the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the later ministry of John the Baptist. Both practiced a type of asceticism and removed themselves from the life of Jerusalem. Both practiced baptism and associated this rite with initiation and repentance. Finally, John and the Qumran group were both eschatologically minded, awaiting God’s final end-time activity in history. Nevertheless, many significant differences exist between John and the Qumran sect.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AppearanceandIdentity\">Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>Mark’s Gospel begins with an account of John the Baptist’s appearance: “John the Baptist . . . lived in the wilderness and was preaching that people should be baptized to show that they had turned from their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Mk 1:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). A rich OT background lies behind John’s association with the wilderness, in this case the wilderness of Judea. It was in the wilderness that God revealed himself to Moses (Ex 3), gave the law, and entered into the covenant with Israel (ch 19). It was also the site of refuge for David (1 Sm 23–26; Ps 63) and Elijah (1 Kgs 19), and in this light became the anticipated site of God’s future deliverance (Is 40:3-5; Ez 47:1-12; Hos 2:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The unusual dress of John the Baptist—“clothing made of camel’s hair, with a leather belt around his waist” (Mk 1:6, <span>niv<\/span>)—may have suggested to his audience an association with Elijah in particular (2 Kgs 1:8) or with the prophets in general (Zec 13:4). His diet, “locusts and wild honey” (Mk 1:6), was Levitically clean, reflecting one who lived off the desert (such food was also eaten at Qumran) and formed part of the broader asceticism practiced by John and his disciples (Mt 9:14; 11:18).<\/p>\n<p>Who did John understand himself to be? In answer to questions by the multitude whether he was the Messiah, Elijah, or the expected prophet (Jn 1:20-23), John only identified himself as “a voice crying in the wilderness, ‘Prepare the way of the Lord’ ” (Is 40:3). The background for the question lies at the end of the OT period. Prophecy, on the one hand, was considered to have ceased (Zec 13:2-6); yet, on the other hand, it was expected to appear again before the coming of the messianic kingdom (see Jl 2:28-29; Mal 3:1-4). Some anticipated this final prophet to be one who was like Moses (Dt 18:15), others a returning Elijah as foretold in Malachi 4:5-6. While John personally refrained from identifying himself with these specific expectations (Jn 1:20-23), it is clear that his dress, lifestyle, and message caused the people to identify him with this end-time prophet (Mt 14:5; Mk 11:32). Jesus also saw John as this final “Elijah-like” prophet (Mt 11:7-15), who from Malachi’s prophecy was to be a forerunner to the coming of the Lord (Mal 3:1-4; 4:5-6).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsProclamation\">John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>John’s proclamation involved three elements: a warning of imminent judgment at the hands of the Coming One, a call for repentance in light of the coming kingdom of heaven, and a demand to express this repentance in concrete ethical terms. Many Jews looked forward confidently to the messianic judgment as a time of blessing for themselves and destruction for the gentile oppressors. John, however, warned that Jewish ancestry was false security in the coming judgment (Lk 3:8); true repentance was the only means of escaping destruction (Mt 3:2). John anticipated this judgment at the hands of the Coming One, who would baptize the nation with “the Holy Spirit and with fire” (Lk 3:16). Fire represented the OT means of destruction in the end time (Mal 4:1) as well as purification (Mal 3:1-4), while the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the end time connoted blessing (Is 32:15; Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28) and purification (Is 4:2-4). The judgment anticipated by John was therefore twofold: destruction for the unrepentant, and blessing for the penitent and righteous (Mt 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>In light of this imminent event John called for repentance on the part of his listeners (Mt 3:2), a true “turning back” or “turning toward” God in obedience that would bring forgiveness of sin. Such a turnabout in an individual’s relation with God should be lived out in one’s everyday dealings: fairness on the part of tax collectors (Lk 3:12-13) and soldiers (v 14), and the general requirement of compassion for the poor (vv 10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsBaptism\">John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels record that John baptized those repentant of their sins at several locations: the Jordan River (Mk 1:5), Bethany beyond the Jordan (Jn 1:28), and Aenon near Salim (Jn 3:23). This practice was an integral part of John’s call for repentance, given in light of the approaching judgment and the appearance of the Coming One. The baptism of the penitent symbolized desire for forgiveness of sin, a renunciation of past life, and a desire to be included in the coming messianic kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>What was the background for John’s practice of baptism? From the OT we know of ceremonial lustrations or washings that guaranteed ritual purity (Lv 14–15; Nm 19). Unlike John’s baptism, these washings were repetitive in nature and referred predominantly to ritual rather than moral cleansing. The prophets, however, urged a moral purification associated with the washing of water (Is 1:16-18; Jer 4:14). More significantly, the prophets anticipated a cleansing by God in the end times preceding the Day of Judgment (Ez 36:25; Zec 13:1; cf. Is 44:3), an eschatological element that John may have assumed was being fulfilled in his water baptism.<\/p>\n<p>Another precedent for John’s practice may have been proselyte baptism, a rite (along with circumcision and the offering of sacrifices) that constituted the conversion of a Gentile to Judaism. Common to both proselyte baptism and John’s baptism were the emphasis on an ethical break with the past, a once-for-all character, and the similarity of immersion. Notable differences were that John’s baptism was for Jews, not Gentile converts, and that it had a marked eschatological character as a preparation for the new age. Unless John, in light of the imminence of the messianic age, consciously treated all Jews as “pagan” in need of a baptism of repentance (cf. Mt 3:7-10), it is doubtful that proselyte baptism formed the primary background for John’s baptismal ministry.<\/p>\n<p>If John’s baptism had a clear association with the forgiveness of sin, the question naturally arises as to why Jesus, the Son of God, sought baptism from John. John himself asks this very question of Jesus (Mt 3:14), to which Jesus responds, “It must be done, because we must do everything that is right” (v 15, <span>nlt<\/span>). First, it is clear that Jesus’ baptism represented an act of obedience on his part to God’s will as he saw it. Second, by submitting to the baptism of John, Jesus was clearly validating the ministry and message of John. The imminent coming of the kingdom and its Messiah, and the need for repentance in anticipation of this event that John proclaimed, were affirmed by Jesus through baptism. Third, by being baptized, Jesus condemned the self-righteous for their lack of repentance and took a stand with the penitent publicans and sinners awaiting the kingdom of God (Lk 7:29-30). Fourth, Jesus stepped forward for baptism not as an individual in need of forgiveness but as one who represented the people of God. His baptism, therefore, demonstrated solidarity with the people in their need of deliverance, even as he is judged in their place on the cross. Finally, the voice from heaven (Mk 1:11) and the descent of the Spirit (Lk 3:21-22) signify the inauguration of Jesus’ own ministry through his baptism by John.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsViewofJesus\">John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>Throughout his ministry John pointed beyond himself to one “who is far greater than I am—so much greater that I am not even worthy to be his slave” (Mk 1:7, <span>nlt<\/span>). His self-understanding apparently sprang from the application of Isaiah 40:3 to himself, that he was the preparer or forerunner for God’s coming activity through the Messiah (Lk 3:4-6). When asked by curious spectators, John firmly denied that he was the Messiah, and according to the Gospel accounts, subordinated himself to the Coming One (Mk 1:7-8; Jn 1:26-28; 3:28-31). The coming of Jesus to baptism seems to represent the first time John identified these expectations with Jesus himself (Jn 1:35-36). His recognition of Jesus as the Messiah prior to baptism (Mt 3:14) was confirmed by the descent of the Holy Spirit as a dove and the voice from heaven quoting a phrase from an OT messianic psalm (Mk 1:11a, from Ps 2:7), together with a phrase from a Suffering Servant song of Isaiah (Mk 1:11b, from Is 42:1). In the fourth Gospel, John the Baptist goes even further in acknowledging Jesus to be the “Lamb of God” (Jn 1:29), in anticipation of Jesus’ sacrificial role on the cross. And John recognized him as “God’s Chosen One” (v 34, <span>neb<\/span>—another term for the Messiah; Ps 2:7, see Mk 1:11).<\/p>\n<p>In light of John’s strong affirmation, it is at first difficult to understand his questioning of Jesus while imprisoned: “Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?” (Mt 11:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). Some have suggested that John was merely asking for the sake of his disciples, or that the question reflected John’s despondency with being imprisoned. It is more likely, however, that the question represents John’s own confusion with the activity expected of the Messiah. John had proclaimed a Coming One who would bring a baptism of fire and judgment upon the wicked (Lk 3:16). It may have been difficult for him to understand Jesus’ different emphases on forgiveness and acceptance of sinners (Mt 9:9-13) and his healing of the sick (Mt 8–9). When John’s disciples brought their master’s question to Jesus, asking whether or not he was the Messiah, Jesus responded by quoting Isaiah 35:5-6 (see also Is 61:1). This text proclaims the activities of healing and proclaiming salvation to the poor to be fulfillments of the Messiah’s role, even though they may not have been what John or countless other Jews expected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusViewofJohn\">Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>That Jesus highly regarded John the Baptist is indicated by his baptism by John. It is also explicitly stated on several occasions. Jesus called him the greatest man to have ever lived (Lk 7:28). (Of course, he was not as great as Jesus, the God-man.) Jesus also said that John was a burning and shining lamp (Jn 5:33-35) and that he practiced a baptism divinely ordained (Lk 20:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>John’s uniqueness, however, lies in the fact that he stood at the turning of the ages. He was the last of the old era, the period of the law and the prophets (Lk 16:16), which was to precede the coming of the messianic age (the kingdom of God). John was the last of the prophets, the greatest of them, the Elijah figure who would prepare the way for the judgment of God (Mt 11:13-15; Lk 1:17). Because John belonged to the era of the law and the prophets, however, he was not as great as the “least” already in the kingdom of God (Mt 11:11)—that is, those who belonged to the era of the kingdom’s appearance in Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ArrestImprisonmentandMartyrdom\">Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>To understand why John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas, one has to grasp the messianic excitement caused by John’s appearance and message (Lk 3:15-18). Herod and other secular rulers were obviously suspicious of anyone who might stir up the crowds with predictions of a coming messianic ruler. Other messianic movements had arisen before John, which resulted in outbreaks of violence against the Roman-Herodian rulership. Moreover, Herod Antipas was under heavy criticism for his marriage with Herodias, the ex-wife of his brother Philip. His first marriage, with the daughter of Aretus II, constituted a political alliance between the Herodian family and the Nabatean kingdom of Perea. His new relationship with Herodias was perceived as a breach of the political alliance and led to friction between the two families. John’s denunciation of Herod’s new marriage (Mt 14:3-12) could thus have been interpreted by Herod as a subversive rousing of sentiment against his authority. The Jewish historian Josephus states that Herod did, in fact, arrest John because he feared John’s influence over the crowds. According to Josephus, John was imprisoned at the fortress Machaerus on the eastern side of the Dead Sea. That he was not killed immediately was due to Herod’s personal fear of the righteous John (Mk 6:2) and of the people’s reaction (Mt 14:5). On a point about which Josephus is silent, the Gospels record that it was Herodias’s feelings against John (Mk 6:17) and her plot, through the dancing of her daughter, which brought about the beheading of John (vv 21-29). John was beheaded at Herodias’s request in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29 or 30.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheDisciplesofJohn\">The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p>While it is clear that a band of disciples formed around John in his lifetime (Jn 1:35), to suggest that he intended to begin a continuing movement is contradicted by his message on the imminent Day of Judgment. Apparently, John’s disciples consisted of a small group of those who had been baptized by him and were awaiting the coming Messiah. Some transferred their loyalty to Jesus after John had identified Jesus as the Coming One (Jn 1:37). Others, however, apparently stayed on with their teacher, communicating with the imprisoned John concerning the activities of Jesus (Lk 7:18-23) and, after his death, taking the body for burial (Mk 6:29).<\/p>\n<p>We know little about the activities and practices of the band of disciples clustered around John. We do know, however, that fasting was one practice specifically associated with the group, and one that marked them as similar to the Pharisees (Mt 9:14). In this practice they no doubt followed the example of John himself (Lk 7:33). Prayer and fasting were often linked in late Judaism. The disciples of John were also known for the prayers taught by their master (11:1). Seeing this practice, the disciples of Jesus asked the Lord to teach them to pray, to which Jesus responded with the Lord’s Prayer (vv 2-4).<\/p>\n<p>After his death it is likely that other disciples of John joined the followers of Jesus (see Lk 7:29-30). Not all did so, however, as disciples of John were encountered by Paul and other Christians approximately 25 years later in Ephesus (Acts 18:24–29:7). Upon hearing witness to Jesus, these followers of John proclaimed Jesus as Messiah. When Paul baptized them in the name of Jesus they received the Holy Spirit (19:4-7). Even so, it is apparent from later documents that various groups continued to honor John, even considering him the Messiah, centuries after the NT period.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOHN THE BAPTIST<\/h3>\n<p>Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29, while Jesus was still ministering.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>• Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>• John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>• Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>• The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BirthInfancyandBoyhood\">Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s Gospel is our only source of information concerning the birth and boyhood of John. The Gospel writer states that John was born in the hill country of Judah (Lk 1:39) of priestly descent, being the son of Zechariah, a priest of the order of Abijah, and Elizabeth, a descendant of Aaron (v 5). Both parents were righteous in the sight of God, following all the commandments closely (v 6). Like the birth of Jesus, only to a much lesser degree, the birth of John the Baptist is described in Luke as extraordinary. The angel Gabriel announced the coming birth to Zechariah in the temple; to the older, barren Elizabeth it came as an answer to prayer (vv 8-13). John’s name is announced to Zechariah by the angel, even as his purpose as forerunner is revealed before birth (vv 13-17). Such a consecration from birth is reminiscent of the call of the OT prophet Jeremiah (cf. Jer 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>There existed some familial relationship between the families of John and Jesus. Elizabeth is described as a relative of Mary (Lk 1:36), which may connote cousin or aunt, or may only mean being from the same tribe.<\/p>\n<p>John’s childhood, as that of Jesus, is left quite vague in the Gospel account. All that is said is that “John grew up and became strong in spirit. Then he lived out in the wilderness until he began his public ministry to Israel” (Lk 1:80, <span>nlt<\/span>). Some scholars have suggested that John might have been adopted as a boy by the Essenes (as was their practice) at Qumran and reared in their wilderness community, adjacent to the Dead Sea and near the Jordan River. There are some similarities between the activities of the Qumran sect, known through the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the later ministry of John the Baptist. Both practiced a type of asceticism and removed themselves from the life of Jerusalem. Both practiced baptism and associated this rite with initiation and repentance. Finally, John and the Qumran group were both eschatologically minded, awaiting God’s final end-time activity in history. Nevertheless, many significant differences exist between John and the Qumran sect.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AppearanceandIdentity\">Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>Mark’s Gospel begins with an account of John the Baptist’s appearance: “John the Baptist . . . lived in the wilderness and was preaching that people should be baptized to show that they had turned from their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Mk 1:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). A rich OT background lies behind John’s association with the wilderness, in this case the wilderness of Judea. It was in the wilderness that God revealed himself to Moses (Ex 3), gave the law, and entered into the covenant with Israel (ch 19). It was also the site of refuge for David (1 Sm 23–26; Ps 63) and Elijah (1 Kgs 19), and in this light became the anticipated site of God’s future deliverance (Is 40:3-5; Ez 47:1-12; Hos 2:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The unusual dress of John the Baptist—“clothing made of camel’s hair, with a leather belt around his waist” (Mk 1:6, <span>niv<\/span>)—may have suggested to his audience an association with Elijah in particular (2 Kgs 1:8) or with the prophets in general (Zec 13:4). His diet, “locusts and wild honey” (Mk 1:6), was Levitically clean, reflecting one who lived off the desert (such food was also eaten at Qumran) and formed part of the broader asceticism practiced by John and his disciples (Mt 9:14; 11:18).<\/p>\n<p>Who did John understand himself to be? In answer to questions by the multitude whether he was the Messiah, Elijah, or the expected prophet (Jn 1:20-23), John only identified himself as “a voice crying in the wilderness, ‘Prepare the way of the Lord’ ” (Is 40:3). The background for the question lies at the end of the OT period. Prophecy, on the one hand, was considered to have ceased (Zec 13:2-6); yet, on the other hand, it was expected to appear again before the coming of the messianic kingdom (see Jl 2:28-29; Mal 3:1-4). Some anticipated this final prophet to be one who was like Moses (Dt 18:15), others a returning Elijah as foretold in Malachi 4:5-6. While John personally refrained from identifying himself with these specific expectations (Jn 1:20-23), it is clear that his dress, lifestyle, and message caused the people to identify him with this end-time prophet (Mt 14:5; Mk 11:32). Jesus also saw John as this final “Elijah-like” prophet (Mt 11:7-15), who from Malachi’s prophecy was to be a forerunner to the coming of the Lord (Mal 3:1-4; 4:5-6).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsProclamation\">John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>John’s proclamation involved three elements: a warning of imminent judgment at the hands of the Coming One, a call for repentance in light of the coming kingdom of heaven, and a demand to express this repentance in concrete ethical terms. Many Jews looked forward confidently to the messianic judgment as a time of blessing for themselves and destruction for the gentile oppressors. John, however, warned that Jewish ancestry was false security in the coming judgment (Lk 3:8); true repentance was the only means of escaping destruction (Mt 3:2). John anticipated this judgment at the hands of the Coming One, who would baptize the nation with “the Holy Spirit and with fire” (Lk 3:16). Fire represented the OT means of destruction in the end time (Mal 4:1) as well as purification (Mal 3:1-4), while the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the end time connoted blessing (Is 32:15; Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28) and purification (Is 4:2-4). The judgment anticipated by John was therefore twofold: destruction for the unrepentant, and blessing for the penitent and righteous (Mt 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>In light of this imminent event John called for repentance on the part of his listeners (Mt 3:2), a true “turning back” or “turning toward” God in obedience that would bring forgiveness of sin. Such a turnabout in an individual’s relation with God should be lived out in one’s everyday dealings: fairness on the part of tax collectors (Lk 3:12-13) and soldiers (v 14), and the general requirement of compassion for the poor (vv 10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsBaptism\">John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels record that John baptized those repentant of their sins at several locations: the Jordan River (Mk 1:5), Bethany beyond the Jordan (Jn 1:28), and Aenon near Salim (Jn 3:23). This practice was an integral part of John’s call for repentance, given in light of the approaching judgment and the appearance of the Coming One. The baptism of the penitent symbolized desire for forgiveness of sin, a renunciation of past life, and a desire to be included in the coming messianic kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>What was the background for John’s practice of baptism? From the OT we know of ceremonial lustrations or washings that guaranteed ritual purity (Lv 14–15; Nm 19). Unlike John’s baptism, these washings were repetitive in nature and referred predominantly to ritual rather than moral cleansing. The prophets, however, urged a moral purification associated with the washing of water (Is 1:16-18; Jer 4:14). More significantly, the prophets anticipated a cleansing by God in the end times preceding the Day of Judgment (Ez 36:25; Zec 13:1; cf. Is 44:3), an eschatological element that John may have assumed was being fulfilled in his water baptism.<\/p>\n<p>Another precedent for John’s practice may have been proselyte baptism, a rite (along with circumcision and the offering of sacrifices) that constituted the conversion of a Gentile to Judaism. Common to both proselyte baptism and John’s baptism were the emphasis on an ethical break with the past, a once-for-all character, and the similarity of immersion. Notable differences were that John’s baptism was for Jews, not Gentile converts, and that it had a marked eschatological character as a preparation for the new age. Unless John, in light of the imminence of the messianic age, consciously treated all Jews as “pagan” in need of a baptism of repentance (cf. Mt 3:7-10), it is doubtful that proselyte baptism formed the primary background for John’s baptismal ministry.<\/p>\n<p>If John’s baptism had a clear association with the forgiveness of sin, the question naturally arises as to why Jesus, the Son of God, sought baptism from John. John himself asks this very question of Jesus (Mt 3:14), to which Jesus responds, “It must be done, because we must do everything that is right” (v 15, <span>nlt<\/span>). First, it is clear that Jesus’ baptism represented an act of obedience on his part to God’s will as he saw it. Second, by submitting to the baptism of John, Jesus was clearly validating the ministry and message of John. The imminent coming of the kingdom and its Messiah, and the need for repentance in anticipation of this event that John proclaimed, were affirmed by Jesus through baptism. Third, by being baptized, Jesus condemned the self-righteous for their lack of repentance and took a stand with the penitent publicans and sinners awaiting the kingdom of God (Lk 7:29-30). Fourth, Jesus stepped forward for baptism not as an individual in need of forgiveness but as one who represented the people of God. His baptism, therefore, demonstrated solidarity with the people in their need of deliverance, even as he is judged in their place on the cross. Finally, the voice from heaven (Mk 1:11) and the descent of the Spirit (Lk 3:21-22) signify the inauguration of Jesus’ own ministry through his baptism by John.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsViewofJesus\">John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>Throughout his ministry John pointed beyond himself to one “who is far greater than I am—so much greater that I am not even worthy to be his slave” (Mk 1:7, <span>nlt<\/span>). His self-understanding apparently sprang from the application of Isaiah 40:3 to himself, that he was the preparer or forerunner for God’s coming activity through the Messiah (Lk 3:4-6). When asked by curious spectators, John firmly denied that he was the Messiah, and according to the Gospel accounts, subordinated himself to the Coming One (Mk 1:7-8; Jn 1:26-28; 3:28-31). The coming of Jesus to baptism seems to represent the first time John identified these expectations with Jesus himself (Jn 1:35-36). His recognition of Jesus as the Messiah prior to baptism (Mt 3:14) was confirmed by the descent of the Holy Spirit as a dove and the voice from heaven quoting a phrase from an OT messianic psalm (Mk 1:11a, from Ps 2:7), together with a phrase from a Suffering Servant song of Isaiah (Mk 1:11b, from Is 42:1). In the fourth Gospel, John the Baptist goes even further in acknowledging Jesus to be the “Lamb of God” (Jn 1:29), in anticipation of Jesus’ sacrificial role on the cross. And John recognized him as “God’s Chosen One” (v 34, <span>neb<\/span>—another term for the Messiah; Ps 2:7, see Mk 1:11).<\/p>\n<p>In light of John’s strong affirmation, it is at first difficult to understand his questioning of Jesus while imprisoned: “Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?” (Mt 11:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). Some have suggested that John was merely asking for the sake of his disciples, or that the question reflected John’s despondency with being imprisoned. It is more likely, however, that the question represents John’s own confusion with the activity expected of the Messiah. John had proclaimed a Coming One who would bring a baptism of fire and judgment upon the wicked (Lk 3:16). It may have been difficult for him to understand Jesus’ different emphases on forgiveness and acceptance of sinners (Mt 9:9-13) and his healing of the sick (Mt 8–9). When John’s disciples brought their master’s question to Jesus, asking whether or not he was the Messiah, Jesus responded by quoting Isaiah 35:5-6 (see also Is 61:1). This text proclaims the activities of healing and proclaiming salvation to the poor to be fulfillments of the Messiah’s role, even though they may not have been what John or countless other Jews expected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusViewofJohn\">Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>That Jesus highly regarded John the Baptist is indicated by his baptism by John. It is also explicitly stated on several occasions. Jesus called him the greatest man to have ever lived (Lk 7:28). (Of course, he was not as great as Jesus, the God-man.) Jesus also said that John was a burning and shining lamp (Jn 5:33-35) and that he practiced a baptism divinely ordained (Lk 20:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>John’s uniqueness, however, lies in the fact that he stood at the turning of the ages. He was the last of the old era, the period of the law and the prophets (Lk 16:16), which was to precede the coming of the messianic age (the kingdom of God). John was the last of the prophets, the greatest of them, the Elijah figure who would prepare the way for the judgment of God (Mt 11:13-15; Lk 1:17). Because John belonged to the era of the law and the prophets, however, he was not as great as the “least” already in the kingdom of God (Mt 11:11)—that is, those who belonged to the era of the kingdom’s appearance in Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ArrestImprisonmentandMartyrdom\">Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>To understand why John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas, one has to grasp the messianic excitement caused by John’s appearance and message (Lk 3:15-18). Herod and other secular rulers were obviously suspicious of anyone who might stir up the crowds with predictions of a coming messianic ruler. Other messianic movements had arisen before John, which resulted in outbreaks of violence against the Roman-Herodian rulership. Moreover, Herod Antipas was under heavy criticism for his marriage with Herodias, the ex-wife of his brother Philip. His first marriage, with the daughter of Aretus II, constituted a political alliance between the Herodian family and the Nabatean kingdom of Perea. His new relationship with Herodias was perceived as a breach of the political alliance and led to friction between the two families. John’s denunciation of Herod’s new marriage (Mt 14:3-12) could thus have been interpreted by Herod as a subversive rousing of sentiment against his authority. The Jewish historian Josephus states that Herod did, in fact, arrest John because he feared John’s influence over the crowds. According to Josephus, John was imprisoned at the fortress Machaerus on the eastern side of the Dead Sea. That he was not killed immediately was due to Herod’s personal fear of the righteous John (Mk 6:2) and of the people’s reaction (Mt 14:5). On a point about which Josephus is silent, the Gospels record that it was Herodias’s feelings against John (Mk 6:17) and her plot, through the dancing of her daughter, which brought about the beheading of John (vv 21-29). John was beheaded at Herodias’s request in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29 or 30.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheDisciplesofJohn\">The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p>While it is clear that a band of disciples formed around John in his lifetime (Jn 1:35), to suggest that he intended to begin a continuing movement is contradicted by his message on the imminent Day of Judgment. Apparently, John’s disciples consisted of a small group of those who had been baptized by him and were awaiting the coming Messiah. Some transferred their loyalty to Jesus after John had identified Jesus as the Coming One (Jn 1:37). Others, however, apparently stayed on with their teacher, communicating with the imprisoned John concerning the activities of Jesus (Lk 7:18-23) and, after his death, taking the body for burial (Mk 6:29).<\/p>\n<p>We know little about the activities and practices of the band of disciples clustered around John. We do know, however, that fasting was one practice specifically associated with the group, and one that marked them as similar to the Pharisees (Mt 9:14). In this practice they no doubt followed the example of John himself (Lk 7:33). Prayer and fasting were often linked in late Judaism. The disciples of John were also known for the prayers taught by their master (11:1). Seeing this practice, the disciples of Jesus asked the Lord to teach them to pray, to which Jesus responded with the Lord’s Prayer (vv 2-4).<\/p>\n<p>After his death it is likely that other disciples of John joined the followers of Jesus (see Lk 7:29-30). Not all did so, however, as disciples of John were encountered by Paul and other Christians approximately 25 years later in Ephesus (Acts 18:24–29:7). Upon hearing witness to Jesus, these followers of John proclaimed Jesus as Messiah. When Paul baptized them in the name of Jesus they received the Holy Spirit (19:4-7). Even so, it is apparent from later documents that various groups continued to honor John, even considering him the Messiah, centuries after the NT period.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOHN THE BAPTIST Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately AD 29, while Jesus was still ministering. Preview • Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood • Appearance and Identity • John’s Proclamation • ...","summary_en":"JOHN THE BAPTIST Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately AD 29, while Jesus was still ministering. Preview • Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood • Appearance and Identity • John’s Proclamation • ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65946,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","title_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","content_ro":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","summary_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93572,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","title_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","content_ro":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","summary_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121198,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","title_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","content_ro":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","summary_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148824,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","title_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","content_ro":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","summary_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"38":[{"id":20187,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel of John","title_en":"Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>JOHN, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>The fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospels. (See discussion above on John, the Apostle.)<\/p>\n\n<p>The Gospel appears to have been written by one who knew the Jews and the Palestine of Jesus’ day well. He was familiar with Jewish messianic expectations (e.g., Jn 1:20-21; 4:25; 7:40-42; 12:34). He knew of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9) and the contempt the Pharisees had for “the people of the land” (7:49). He knew of the importance attached to the religious schools (v 15). He knew the way the Sabbath was observed and was aware of the provision that the obligation to circumcise on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath regulations (vv 22-23). Throughout the Gospel he moved with certainty in the vast range of Jewish ideas and customs.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same with topography. The writer mentioned many places, and his place-names all seem to be used correctly. He referred to Cana, a village not mentioned in any earlier literature known to us, which means that the reference almost certainly came from someone who actually knew the place. He located Bethany with some precision as about 15 stadia from Jerusalem (about 2 miles, or 3.2 kilometers, 11:18). He had several references to places in or near Jerusalem, such as Bethesda (5:2), Siloam (9:7), and the Kidron Valley (18:1). Of course, this does not rule out some contemporary of John’s, but it makes it difficult to think of the author as a much later individual writing at a distance from Palestine. The evidence as we have it indicates that the writer was a Jew in the Palestine of Jesus’ day.<\/p>\n<p>To many careful readers, it seems that the Gospel bears the stamp of an eyewitness. For example, Jesus was teaching “in the treasury” (8:20). Nothing is made of the point; the incident could easily have been told without it. It looks like a reminiscence of someone who sees the scene in his mind’s eye as he writes. The fact that the house was filled with fragrance when the woman broke the perfume jar (12:3) does not materially affect the account but is the kind of detail that one who was there would remember. The author noted that the loaves used in the feeding of the multitude were barley loaves (6:9) and that Jesus’ tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top to bottom (19:23). He told us that the branches with which Jesus was greeted were palm branches (12:13), and that it was night when Judas went out (13:30). Such touches are found throughout the Gospel, and it seems unjustified to treat them as no more than an attempt to create verisimilitude. They seem much more like indications that the author was writing about events in which he had himself taken part.<\/p>\n<p>The early church accepted Johannine authorship without question. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all see the apostle as the author. The first to quote this Gospel by name was Theophilus of Antioch, about <span>AD<\/span> 180.<\/p>\n<p>Those who object to Johannine authorship emphasize the differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics. The argument is that if Jesus was anything like the Christ portrayed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he could not be like the Christ of the fourth Gospel. This is a completely subjective argument, ignoring the fact that any great man will appear differently to different people. The judgment of the church throughout the centuries has been that Jesus was large enough to inspire both portraits. To put the same point another way, we have no reason for holding that the first three Evangelists tell us all there is to know about Jesus. There is no contradiction. John simply brings out other aspects of Jesus’ life and teachings.<\/p>\n<p>While we cannot prove beyond all doubt that John the apostle was the author, we can say that there is more reason for holding to this view than to any other.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>It has been usual for conservatives and liberals alike to date this writing in the last decade of the first century or early in the second. Some liberal scholars have put it well into the second century, but this is not common, and it is remarkable that there has been such a considerable measure of agreement.<\/p>\n<p>It is said that this Gospel is dependent on the Synoptics, which means that it must be dated sometime after them. But this argument has been widely abandoned in recent times. There is so much in John that is without parallel in the other three Gospels, and conversely so much in the other three that John might have used had he known it, that it is very difficult indeed to hold that this writer had any of the other Gospels before him when he wrote, or even that he had read them. Such resemblances as there are seem better explained by common use of oral tradition.<\/p>\n<p>It is also argued that there is a very developed theology in John and that we must allow time for its development. Granted, the theology of this Gospel is profound, but this does not require that we must wait for it until the end of the first century. The theology of the Letter to the Romans is also profound, and there is no reason for dating that writing later than the 50s. On the ground of development, then, there is no reason for putting John later than Romans. Development is a slippery argument at best, for it usually takes place at uneven rates, and we have no means of knowing how fast it took place in the area where the author lived.<\/p>\n<p>Other arguments for a late date are no more conclusive. For example, it is urged that the ecclesiastical system presupposed by the Gospel is too late for the time of the apostle John, and that the sacramental system of chapters 3 and 6 must have taken time to develop. But John does not mention any sacrament. It is true that many scholars think these chapters refer to baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but the fact is that John mentions neither.<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising in view of the way the traditional arguments have crumbled away that many in recent times are arguing that John must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70. If it were later, why does not John have some reference to it? Some of his language appears to be earlier. In 5:2 he says there “is” (not “was”) a pool called Bethesda. And he often refers to the Twelve as Jesus’ disciples, or “his” disciples, or the like. In later times Christians usually said “the” disciples, for they saw no need to say whose the disciples were. But in the early days, when Christians were in contact with rabbis (each of whom had his disciples), it was important to show that Jesus’ disciples were in mind. It is important also that John makes no reference to any of the synoptic Gospels. The simplest explanation is that he had not seen them. They were not yet widely circulated.<\/p>\n<p>None of this enables us to date this Gospel with precision. But the weight of evidence points to an early date (before <span>AD<\/span> 70).<\/p>\n<p>The author was John the apostle, a Jew. However, the writing gives evidence of contact with Greek thought, for example, in the reference to Christ as “the Word” in chapter 1 and the translation of words like “rabbi” (1:38). It is almost universally held that such considerations compel us to see the work as originating in a center of Greek culture, and Ephesus has traditionally been favored. Before the end of the second century we have Irenaeus writing that John published the Gospel during his residence at Ephesus.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to similarities between John and the Odes of Solomon, which they think came from Syria. As there are also some resemblances in the language of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, this is held to show that John was written in Syria, probably at Antioch. Others again think that Egypt was the place, and they support this by pointing out that the oldest fragment of a manuscript of this Gospel was found there. There is no real evidence, and we are left with probabilities. There is much to be said for accepting the evidence of Irenaeus and seeing Ephesus as the place of origin, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>There is no real indication of the intended destination. From 20:31 we learn that the book was written that the readers might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and that by believing they might have life. The Gospel, then, has an evangelistic aim. But it is also possible that “believe” means “keep on believing”—“go on in faith,” rather than “begin to believe.” That is to say, the book may have been meant from the beginning to build people up in the faith. Probably we should not distinguish between these aims too sharply. Both may well be in mind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Several possible backgrounds to the Gospel have been suggested. The Greek interest is obvious, and this writing has sometimes been called the Gospel of the Hellenists. The suggestion is that we should look to Greek writings, perhaps the works of the philosophers or Philo of Alexandria, to find the right background against which to understand what John has written. This approach may be seen in the work of Rudolf Bultmann, who thought specifically of Gnosticism. Indeed, for Bultmann one of the sources of this Gospel was a discourse source that he thought was taken from non-Christian Gnosticism. Not many have been prepared to follow Bultmann, but a number of recent commentators have discerned some form of Gnosticism as the backdrop to John.<\/p>\n<p>While such views are put forward seriously, there are some substantial objections. One is that, despite the confident assertions of some scholars, Gnosticism has never been shown to be earlier than Christianity. In the form in which it comes before us in history, it is a Christian heresy, and of course, the Christian faith must appear before a Christian heresy is possible. Another objection is that there is a basic difference between the two systems. Gnosticism is concerned with knowledge (the very word is derived from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>,<\/em> “knowledge”). Its “redeemer” is one who comes from heaven with knowledge. But John does not subscribe to the view that man is saved by knowledge. The Redeemer comes to take away the sin of the world (1:29). Gnosticism tells people that life is an upward struggle; Christianity tells of a Savior who came down to raise them up. It is not easy to see any form of Gnosticism as the essential background to Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Much more significant is John’s Semitic background. Especially important here is the OT, accepted as sacred Scripture by Jew and Christian alike. It lies constantly behind John’s statements, and it must be studied carefully if John is to be understood. It is plain that John knew and loved the Septuagint, the translation into Greek of the Hebrew OT. Again and again, the Septuagint can be shown to lie behind what John says.<\/p>\n<p>In modern times important discoveries have been made at Qumran, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. Among the scrolls unearthed in the caves of this area are several that have affinities with John. Indeed, one of the interesting facts about the scrolls is that they have more parallels with John than with any other part of the NT, a fact difficult to explain if John was written late and at a distance from Palestine. The resemblances to the Qumran writings must be viewed with care, for there is often a linguistic resemblance where the thinking is quite different. For example, both use the unusual expression “the Spirit of truth.” But where John means one of the persons of the Trinity, the scrolls speak of “a spirit of truth” and “a spirit of error” striving in the souls of people. The connection is real, but John is clearly not dependent on the scrolls for his thinking. The contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they afford additional evidence that this Gospel is basically Palestinian and must be understood against a background of first-century Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Other backgrounds have been suggested, such as the Hermetic literature. This is a group of writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus (“Hermes Thrice-greatest”), a designation of the Egyptian god Thoth. There are indeed some points of contact with John, but they are few in comparison with those of writings rooted in Palestine. It is difficult to take such suggestions seriously. John is essentially Palestinian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The writer told us that Jesus did many “signs” (or miracles) that he had not recorded, but “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life” (Jn 20:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). John wrote to show that Jesus is the Messiah. But he did not do this simply with a view to conveying interesting information. He wanted his readers to see this knowledge as a challenge to faith; when they believe, they will have life. John sought to bring men and women to Christ; he had an evangelistic aim. That does not exhaust what he was trying to do, for his words have meaning for believers. It is important that believers have a right knowledge of Jesus and that they continue to believe.<\/p>\n<p>The main theological teaching of this Gospel, then, is that God has sent his Messiah, Jesus. He is the very Son of God, and he comes to bring life (3:16). Though Jesus told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, this is not often said so specifically. The avoidance of the term might well be because of the political overtones it had acquired among the Jews at large. They looked for a Messiah who would fight the Romans. He would defeat them and set up a mighty world empire with its capital in Jerusalem. Jesus was not aiming at anything like that, and it was important that he avoid the kind of language that would give that impression. But though the conventional messianic terminology is avoided, John left no doubt that Jesus was God’s chosen one. Again and again he depicted Jesus as fulfilling messianic functions. For example, in the long discourse in chapter 6 we see Jesus as the bread from heaven, fulfilling the expectation that when Messiah came, he would renew the manna; and in the giving of sight to the blind man (ch 9) we have another messianic function (cf. Is 35:5).<\/p>\n<p>With this greatness of Jesus, John also combined teaching about his lowliness. A continuing, though unobtrusive, strand of Johannine teaching is that Jesus depends on the Father for everything. Apart from the Father, Jesus said, he could do nothing (Jn 5:30). His very food is to do the Father’s will (4:34). He lives through the Father (6:57). It is the Father who gives him his disciples (6:37, 44; 17:6). It is the Father who bears witness to him (5:32, 37). John insists that Jesus is in no sense independent of the Father. In the mission of Jesus, John sees the working out of the purpose of the Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue and Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>John begins with a prologue (1:1-18) that is unlike anything in any of the other Gospels. In it he refers to Jesus as “the Word,” a term that has points of contact with both Greek and Hebrew thinking. As John uses it, it conveys the thought that Jesus is the expression of the mind of the Father. John speaks of the Word as God (1:1), sees him as active in creation (1:3-5), goes on to the witness borne to him by John the Baptist (1:6-8), speaks of the coming of the Word into the world (1:9-14), and finishes with a section on the greatness of the Word (1:15-18). In this prologue he briefly introduces some of the great themes that will be developed throughout the Gospel. It is a majestic introduction to the whole.<\/p>\n<p>Next we have the beginnings of Jesus’ public ministry (1:19-51). Jesus’ work was preceded by that of John the Baptist, and the Evangelist tells us first about the kind of witness that the Baptist gave to Jesus. Witness is one of his important concepts, and witness is all that John the Baptist does in this Gospel. From this witness we move to the way the first disciples came to Jesus. We learn something of how Andrew and Peter came to know the Lord. We read also of Philip and Nathanael, of whom we learn little or nothing in the other Gospels.<\/p>\n<h5>The Signs and Discourses (2:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The public ministry of Jesus is described in a very distinctive way in this Gospel. John has a long section (chs 2–12) in which he tells of a number of miracles Jesus did, interweaving into his account a series of discourses. Sometimes these are addresses given to groups of people, and sometimes they are talks with individuals. Some scholars call this section of the Gospel the Book of Signs, thus emphasizing the prominent place given to seven miracles. For John they are not simply wonders. They are meaningful; in the literal sense of the term they are <em>sign<\/em>ificant.<\/p>\n<p>The first of them is the turning of the water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee (2:1-11). The water in question is connected with Jewish rites of purification (v 6), and the story is surely to teach us that Jesus transforms life. He changes the water of the law into the wine of the gospel. As a result of this “sign,” his disciples believed in him (v 11). John went on to tell how Jesus went up to Jerusalem and drove the traders out of the temple. They were selling animals for sacrifice and changing money. But their business was being done in the Court of the Gentiles, the only place in the temple where a Gentile could come to meditate and pray.<\/p>\n<p>The first discourse is on the new birth (3:1-21). Jesus talked with Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, about the necessity for radical renewal if one is to enter the kingdom. Jesus was speaking of God’s regenerating activity, not some human reformation. Following this, John records a dispute between some of John’s disciples with a Jew on the subject of purification. This opens the way for a section that shows the superiority of Jesus over John the Baptist—by the Baptist’s own confession (3:22-36).<\/p>\n<p>The second discourse is really a long conversation Jesus had with the woman of Samaria, whom he met by a well (4:1-42). It turns on “the water of life,” a term that is not fully explained in this chapter but which we later find points to the life-giving Spirit (7:38-39). This leads to the story of the second sign, the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54), notable for the fact that Jesus healed at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>The third sign is the healing of the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (5:1-18). This man had spent many years waiting for healing at the moving of the water. Jesus told him to get up and walk, and he did. Because it was done on a Sabbath, the Pharisees objected. This leads to Jesus’ third discourse, that on the divine Son (5:19-47). Here the closeness of the relationship of Jesus to the Father is stressed, and his place in the judgment is brought out. There is emphasis also on the variety of witness who encountered Jesus, which shows how reasonable it is to accept him as God’s own Son.<\/p>\n<p>John’s fourth sign is the one miracle (apart from the resurrection) found in all four Gospels: the feeding of the 5,000 (6:1-15). It is followed by Jesus’ walking on water (vv 16-21), which seems to be meant as the fifth sign (though some scholars think not; if they are right, there are only six signs). Then comes the fourth discourse, the great sermon on the bread of life (vv 22-59). Jesus is this bread, which he gives to all men and women who believe in him. There are references to eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv 50-58), which point to his death. Some have seen in them a reference to Communion, but it is hard to see why Jesus should refer in this way to an as-yet-nonexistent sacrament. Moreover, much the same effect is attributed in the same discourse to believing (vv 35, 47). It seems best to understand Jesus as meaning that people must believe in him as the one who would die for them in order for them to have life.<\/p>\n<p>There is a section detailing Peter’s affirmation of loyalty in the face of some who drifted away from the Master (6:67-71). Then we come to the fifth discourse, on the life-giving Spirit (7:1-52). John has an important explanatory point of his own when he tells us that at the time the Spirit had not been given because Jesus had not yet been glorified (v 39). The fullness of the Spirit depends on the completion of the work of Christ in his death and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The sixth discourse tells of the light of the world (8:12-59). This aspect of Jesus’ person and ministry is dramatically brought out in the sixth sign, the healing of the man born blind (ch 9). It is a lively narrative, as the healed man conducts a spirited defense against the Pharisees who belittled Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most beautiful of all the illustrations of Jesus’ relations to his people is that on which he dwells in the seventh discourse, where he speaks of himself as the good shepherd (ch 10). There is the obvious truth that sheep depend entirely on their shepherd, but Jesus says something else. Whereas earthly shepherds live to meet the needs of their sheep, Jesus laid down his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The final sign is the raising of Lazarus (11:1-44), a man who had been dead for four days. The story graphically brings out Jesus’ power over death and his readiness to confer the gift of life. Jesus speaks of himself as “the resurrection and the life” (v 25); death cannot defeat him. He brings life to the dead, to the spiritually dead as well as to physically dead Lazarus. John goes on to note the reaction to this miracle: some believed, but some opposed Jesus (vv 45-57). He includes a notable saying of Caiaphas, the high priest, that one man should die for the people (vv 50-52). Caiaphas was speaking as a cynical politician (better one dead, however innocent, than the whole nation be troubled). But John saw in the words the deeper meaning that Jesus’ death would bring salvation to many.<\/p>\n<p>John rounds off his account of the ministry with the story of the anointing of Jesus by a woman in Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the coming of some Greeks to Jesus, and his final summary of what he had taught (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Last Supper<\/h5>\n<p>The account of what went on in the upper room on the night before the Crucifixion is the fullest of all the four Gospels. Curiously, John says nothing about the institution of Communion, a fact that has never been satisfactorily explained. But he tells us how Jesus washed the feet of the disciples (13:1-17), an action splendidly exemplifying the spirit of lowly service so soon to be shown on the cross. Then comes the prophecy of the betrayal, an action that set in motion the events that would lead to the cross (vv 18-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the long discourse that follows, Jesus dealt with some questions posed by his followers and went on to teach them some important truths, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). He develops the thought that he is the true vine, the disciples being vitally joined to him as branches to the vine. It is important for the branches to remain in the vine if they are to have life (15:1-16). Then come some words about suffering that would be of help to them in times of persecution (vv 17-25). Jesus goes on to speak about the Holy Spirit (15:26–16:15). This is a very important passage, for it contains much more about the Spirit than we find elsewhere in Jesus’ words. Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete,” a title not easy to understand. It is in origin a legal term, and at least we can say that it indicates that the Spirit brings friendship, encouragement, and help. Jesus went on to speak of his approaching departure from the disciples and to prepare them for the trying time ahead (16:16-33). This part of the Gospel concludes with Jesus’ great High Priestly prayer. He prayed for the disciples to be one, as he commended them to the care of the heavenly Father (ch 17).<\/p>\n<h5>The Cross and Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, he went forward to meet them and they fell to the ground (18:1-11). He gave himself over to them; they did not take him over. At the outset of his passion narrative, John was making the point that Jesus is sovereign. He was not being defeated by the march of events but was sovereignly doing the will of the Father. John is the only one to tell us that Jesus was taken before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, the reigning high priest (18:12-14, 19-24). He tells also of Peter’s three denials of Jesus (vv 15-27). He did not spend much time on the Jewish trial, but he was much more explicit than the other Evangelists in his account of the Roman trial. Clearly, he had some special knowledge of what went on before Pilate. He presents a magnificent picture of Jesus talking with Pilate about kingship—the Son of God discussing with the representative of Caesar the meaning of sovereignty (vv 33-40).<\/p>\n<p>In his account of the Crucifixion John has a number of touches of his own, notably the way Jesus commended Mary to the care of the beloved disciple (19:26-27), the fact that the cry Jesus uttered as he died was “It is finished” (v 30), and the piercing of his side by a soldier’s spear (vv 31-37).<\/p>\n<p>John proceeds to the narrative of the burial (vv 38-42) and of the empty tomb (20:1-10). He speaks of appearances of the risen Lord to Mary Magdalene (vv 11-18), and to the disciples—both without (vv 19-23) and with Thomas (vv 24-29).<\/p>\n<p>The final chapter, an epilogue, tells of a miraculous catch of fish (21:1-14) and goes on to the moving account of Peter’s threefold declaration of love to Jesus and his restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOHN, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>The fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospels. (See discussion above on John, the Apostle.)<\/p>\n\n<p>The Gospel appears to have been written by one who knew the Jews and the Palestine of Jesus’ day well. He was familiar with Jewish messianic expectations (e.g., Jn 1:20-21; 4:25; 7:40-42; 12:34). He knew of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9) and the contempt the Pharisees had for “the people of the land” (7:49). He knew of the importance attached to the religious schools (v 15). He knew the way the Sabbath was observed and was aware of the provision that the obligation to circumcise on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath regulations (vv 22-23). Throughout the Gospel he moved with certainty in the vast range of Jewish ideas and customs.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same with topography. The writer mentioned many places, and his place-names all seem to be used correctly. He referred to Cana, a village not mentioned in any earlier literature known to us, which means that the reference almost certainly came from someone who actually knew the place. He located Bethany with some precision as about 15 stadia from Jerusalem (about 2 miles, or 3.2 kilometers, 11:18). He had several references to places in or near Jerusalem, such as Bethesda (5:2), Siloam (9:7), and the Kidron Valley (18:1). Of course, this does not rule out some contemporary of John’s, but it makes it difficult to think of the author as a much later individual writing at a distance from Palestine. The evidence as we have it indicates that the writer was a Jew in the Palestine of Jesus’ day.<\/p>\n<p>To many careful readers, it seems that the Gospel bears the stamp of an eyewitness. For example, Jesus was teaching “in the treasury” (8:20). Nothing is made of the point; the incident could easily have been told without it. It looks like a reminiscence of someone who sees the scene in his mind’s eye as he writes. The fact that the house was filled with fragrance when the woman broke the perfume jar (12:3) does not materially affect the account but is the kind of detail that one who was there would remember. The author noted that the loaves used in the feeding of the multitude were barley loaves (6:9) and that Jesus’ tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top to bottom (19:23). He told us that the branches with which Jesus was greeted were palm branches (12:13), and that it was night when Judas went out (13:30). Such touches are found throughout the Gospel, and it seems unjustified to treat them as no more than an attempt to create verisimilitude. They seem much more like indications that the author was writing about events in which he had himself taken part.<\/p>\n<p>The early church accepted Johannine authorship without question. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all see the apostle as the author. The first to quote this Gospel by name was Theophilus of Antioch, about <span>AD<\/span> 180.<\/p>\n<p>Those who object to Johannine authorship emphasize the differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics. The argument is that if Jesus was anything like the Christ portrayed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he could not be like the Christ of the fourth Gospel. This is a completely subjective argument, ignoring the fact that any great man will appear differently to different people. The judgment of the church throughout the centuries has been that Jesus was large enough to inspire both portraits. To put the same point another way, we have no reason for holding that the first three Evangelists tell us all there is to know about Jesus. There is no contradiction. John simply brings out other aspects of Jesus’ life and teachings.<\/p>\n<p>While we cannot prove beyond all doubt that John the apostle was the author, we can say that there is more reason for holding to this view than to any other.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>It has been usual for conservatives and liberals alike to date this writing in the last decade of the first century or early in the second. Some liberal scholars have put it well into the second century, but this is not common, and it is remarkable that there has been such a considerable measure of agreement.<\/p>\n<p>It is said that this Gospel is dependent on the Synoptics, which means that it must be dated sometime after them. But this argument has been widely abandoned in recent times. There is so much in John that is without parallel in the other three Gospels, and conversely so much in the other three that John might have used had he known it, that it is very difficult indeed to hold that this writer had any of the other Gospels before him when he wrote, or even that he had read them. Such resemblances as there are seem better explained by common use of oral tradition.<\/p>\n<p>It is also argued that there is a very developed theology in John and that we must allow time for its development. Granted, the theology of this Gospel is profound, but this does not require that we must wait for it until the end of the first century. The theology of the Letter to the Romans is also profound, and there is no reason for dating that writing later than the 50s. On the ground of development, then, there is no reason for putting John later than Romans. Development is a slippery argument at best, for it usually takes place at uneven rates, and we have no means of knowing how fast it took place in the area where the author lived.<\/p>\n<p>Other arguments for a late date are no more conclusive. For example, it is urged that the ecclesiastical system presupposed by the Gospel is too late for the time of the apostle John, and that the sacramental system of chapters 3 and 6 must have taken time to develop. But John does not mention any sacrament. It is true that many scholars think these chapters refer to baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but the fact is that John mentions neither.<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising in view of the way the traditional arguments have crumbled away that many in recent times are arguing that John must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70. If it were later, why does not John have some reference to it? Some of his language appears to be earlier. In 5:2 he says there “is” (not “was”) a pool called Bethesda. And he often refers to the Twelve as Jesus’ disciples, or “his” disciples, or the like. In later times Christians usually said “the” disciples, for they saw no need to say whose the disciples were. But in the early days, when Christians were in contact with rabbis (each of whom had his disciples), it was important to show that Jesus’ disciples were in mind. It is important also that John makes no reference to any of the synoptic Gospels. The simplest explanation is that he had not seen them. They were not yet widely circulated.<\/p>\n<p>None of this enables us to date this Gospel with precision. But the weight of evidence points to an early date (before <span>AD<\/span> 70).<\/p>\n<p>The author was John the apostle, a Jew. However, the writing gives evidence of contact with Greek thought, for example, in the reference to Christ as “the Word” in chapter 1 and the translation of words like “rabbi” (1:38). It is almost universally held that such considerations compel us to see the work as originating in a center of Greek culture, and Ephesus has traditionally been favored. Before the end of the second century we have Irenaeus writing that John published the Gospel during his residence at Ephesus.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to similarities between John and the Odes of Solomon, which they think came from Syria. As there are also some resemblances in the language of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, this is held to show that John was written in Syria, probably at Antioch. Others again think that Egypt was the place, and they support this by pointing out that the oldest fragment of a manuscript of this Gospel was found there. There is no real evidence, and we are left with probabilities. There is much to be said for accepting the evidence of Irenaeus and seeing Ephesus as the place of origin, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>There is no real indication of the intended destination. From 20:31 we learn that the book was written that the readers might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and that by believing they might have life. The Gospel, then, has an evangelistic aim. But it is also possible that “believe” means “keep on believing”—“go on in faith,” rather than “begin to believe.” That is to say, the book may have been meant from the beginning to build people up in the faith. Probably we should not distinguish between these aims too sharply. Both may well be in mind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Several possible backgrounds to the Gospel have been suggested. The Greek interest is obvious, and this writing has sometimes been called the Gospel of the Hellenists. The suggestion is that we should look to Greek writings, perhaps the works of the philosophers or Philo of Alexandria, to find the right background against which to understand what John has written. This approach may be seen in the work of Rudolf Bultmann, who thought specifically of Gnosticism. Indeed, for Bultmann one of the sources of this Gospel was a discourse source that he thought was taken from non-Christian Gnosticism. Not many have been prepared to follow Bultmann, but a number of recent commentators have discerned some form of Gnosticism as the backdrop to John.<\/p>\n<p>While such views are put forward seriously, there are some substantial objections. One is that, despite the confident assertions of some scholars, Gnosticism has never been shown to be earlier than Christianity. In the form in which it comes before us in history, it is a Christian heresy, and of course, the Christian faith must appear before a Christian heresy is possible. Another objection is that there is a basic difference between the two systems. Gnosticism is concerned with knowledge (the very word is derived from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>,<\/em> “knowledge”). Its “redeemer” is one who comes from heaven with knowledge. But John does not subscribe to the view that man is saved by knowledge. The Redeemer comes to take away the sin of the world (1:29). Gnosticism tells people that life is an upward struggle; Christianity tells of a Savior who came down to raise them up. It is not easy to see any form of Gnosticism as the essential background to Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Much more significant is John’s Semitic background. Especially important here is the OT, accepted as sacred Scripture by Jew and Christian alike. It lies constantly behind John’s statements, and it must be studied carefully if John is to be understood. It is plain that John knew and loved the Septuagint, the translation into Greek of the Hebrew OT. Again and again, the Septuagint can be shown to lie behind what John says.<\/p>\n<p>In modern times important discoveries have been made at Qumran, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. Among the scrolls unearthed in the caves of this area are several that have affinities with John. Indeed, one of the interesting facts about the scrolls is that they have more parallels with John than with any other part of the NT, a fact difficult to explain if John was written late and at a distance from Palestine. The resemblances to the Qumran writings must be viewed with care, for there is often a linguistic resemblance where the thinking is quite different. For example, both use the unusual expression “the Spirit of truth.” But where John means one of the persons of the Trinity, the scrolls speak of “a spirit of truth” and “a spirit of error” striving in the souls of people. The connection is real, but John is clearly not dependent on the scrolls for his thinking. The contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they afford additional evidence that this Gospel is basically Palestinian and must be understood against a background of first-century Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Other backgrounds have been suggested, such as the Hermetic literature. This is a group of writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus (“Hermes Thrice-greatest”), a designation of the Egyptian god Thoth. There are indeed some points of contact with John, but they are few in comparison with those of writings rooted in Palestine. It is difficult to take such suggestions seriously. John is essentially Palestinian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The writer told us that Jesus did many “signs” (or miracles) that he had not recorded, but “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life” (Jn 20:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). John wrote to show that Jesus is the Messiah. But he did not do this simply with a view to conveying interesting information. He wanted his readers to see this knowledge as a challenge to faith; when they believe, they will have life. John sought to bring men and women to Christ; he had an evangelistic aim. That does not exhaust what he was trying to do, for his words have meaning for believers. It is important that believers have a right knowledge of Jesus and that they continue to believe.<\/p>\n<p>The main theological teaching of this Gospel, then, is that God has sent his Messiah, Jesus. He is the very Son of God, and he comes to bring life (3:16). Though Jesus told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, this is not often said so specifically. The avoidance of the term might well be because of the political overtones it had acquired among the Jews at large. They looked for a Messiah who would fight the Romans. He would defeat them and set up a mighty world empire with its capital in Jerusalem. Jesus was not aiming at anything like that, and it was important that he avoid the kind of language that would give that impression. But though the conventional messianic terminology is avoided, John left no doubt that Jesus was God’s chosen one. Again and again he depicted Jesus as fulfilling messianic functions. For example, in the long discourse in chapter 6 we see Jesus as the bread from heaven, fulfilling the expectation that when Messiah came, he would renew the manna; and in the giving of sight to the blind man (ch 9) we have another messianic function (cf. Is 35:5).<\/p>\n<p>With this greatness of Jesus, John also combined teaching about his lowliness. A continuing, though unobtrusive, strand of Johannine teaching is that Jesus depends on the Father for everything. Apart from the Father, Jesus said, he could do nothing (Jn 5:30). His very food is to do the Father’s will (4:34). He lives through the Father (6:57). It is the Father who gives him his disciples (6:37, 44; 17:6). It is the Father who bears witness to him (5:32, 37). John insists that Jesus is in no sense independent of the Father. In the mission of Jesus, John sees the working out of the purpose of the Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue and Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>John begins with a prologue (1:1-18) that is unlike anything in any of the other Gospels. In it he refers to Jesus as “the Word,” a term that has points of contact with both Greek and Hebrew thinking. As John uses it, it conveys the thought that Jesus is the expression of the mind of the Father. John speaks of the Word as God (1:1), sees him as active in creation (1:3-5), goes on to the witness borne to him by John the Baptist (1:6-8), speaks of the coming of the Word into the world (1:9-14), and finishes with a section on the greatness of the Word (1:15-18). In this prologue he briefly introduces some of the great themes that will be developed throughout the Gospel. It is a majestic introduction to the whole.<\/p>\n<p>Next we have the beginnings of Jesus’ public ministry (1:19-51). Jesus’ work was preceded by that of John the Baptist, and the Evangelist tells us first about the kind of witness that the Baptist gave to Jesus. Witness is one of his important concepts, and witness is all that John the Baptist does in this Gospel. From this witness we move to the way the first disciples came to Jesus. We learn something of how Andrew and Peter came to know the Lord. We read also of Philip and Nathanael, of whom we learn little or nothing in the other Gospels.<\/p>\n<h5>The Signs and Discourses (2:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The public ministry of Jesus is described in a very distinctive way in this Gospel. John has a long section (chs 2–12) in which he tells of a number of miracles Jesus did, interweaving into his account a series of discourses. Sometimes these are addresses given to groups of people, and sometimes they are talks with individuals. Some scholars call this section of the Gospel the Book of Signs, thus emphasizing the prominent place given to seven miracles. For John they are not simply wonders. They are meaningful; in the literal sense of the term they are <em>sign<\/em>ificant.<\/p>\n<p>The first of them is the turning of the water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee (2:1-11). The water in question is connected with Jewish rites of purification (v 6), and the story is surely to teach us that Jesus transforms life. He changes the water of the law into the wine of the gospel. As a result of this “sign,” his disciples believed in him (v 11). John went on to tell how Jesus went up to Jerusalem and drove the traders out of the temple. They were selling animals for sacrifice and changing money. But their business was being done in the Court of the Gentiles, the only place in the temple where a Gentile could come to meditate and pray.<\/p>\n<p>The first discourse is on the new birth (3:1-21). Jesus talked with Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, about the necessity for radical renewal if one is to enter the kingdom. Jesus was speaking of God’s regenerating activity, not some human reformation. Following this, John records a dispute between some of John’s disciples with a Jew on the subject of purification. This opens the way for a section that shows the superiority of Jesus over John the Baptist—by the Baptist’s own confession (3:22-36).<\/p>\n<p>The second discourse is really a long conversation Jesus had with the woman of Samaria, whom he met by a well (4:1-42). It turns on “the water of life,” a term that is not fully explained in this chapter but which we later find points to the life-giving Spirit (7:38-39). This leads to the story of the second sign, the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54), notable for the fact that Jesus healed at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>The third sign is the healing of the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (5:1-18). This man had spent many years waiting for healing at the moving of the water. Jesus told him to get up and walk, and he did. Because it was done on a Sabbath, the Pharisees objected. This leads to Jesus’ third discourse, that on the divine Son (5:19-47). Here the closeness of the relationship of Jesus to the Father is stressed, and his place in the judgment is brought out. There is emphasis also on the variety of witness who encountered Jesus, which shows how reasonable it is to accept him as God’s own Son.<\/p>\n<p>John’s fourth sign is the one miracle (apart from the resurrection) found in all four Gospels: the feeding of the 5,000 (6:1-15). It is followed by Jesus’ walking on water (vv 16-21), which seems to be meant as the fifth sign (though some scholars think not; if they are right, there are only six signs). Then comes the fourth discourse, the great sermon on the bread of life (vv 22-59). Jesus is this bread, which he gives to all men and women who believe in him. There are references to eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv 50-58), which point to his death. Some have seen in them a reference to Communion, but it is hard to see why Jesus should refer in this way to an as-yet-nonexistent sacrament. Moreover, much the same effect is attributed in the same discourse to believing (vv 35, 47). It seems best to understand Jesus as meaning that people must believe in him as the one who would die for them in order for them to have life.<\/p>\n<p>There is a section detailing Peter’s affirmation of loyalty in the face of some who drifted away from the Master (6:67-71). Then we come to the fifth discourse, on the life-giving Spirit (7:1-52). John has an important explanatory point of his own when he tells us that at the time the Spirit had not been given because Jesus had not yet been glorified (v 39). The fullness of the Spirit depends on the completion of the work of Christ in his death and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The sixth discourse tells of the light of the world (8:12-59). This aspect of Jesus’ person and ministry is dramatically brought out in the sixth sign, the healing of the man born blind (ch 9). It is a lively narrative, as the healed man conducts a spirited defense against the Pharisees who belittled Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most beautiful of all the illustrations of Jesus’ relations to his people is that on which he dwells in the seventh discourse, where he speaks of himself as the good shepherd (ch 10). There is the obvious truth that sheep depend entirely on their shepherd, but Jesus says something else. Whereas earthly shepherds live to meet the needs of their sheep, Jesus laid down his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The final sign is the raising of Lazarus (11:1-44), a man who had been dead for four days. The story graphically brings out Jesus’ power over death and his readiness to confer the gift of life. Jesus speaks of himself as “the resurrection and the life” (v 25); death cannot defeat him. He brings life to the dead, to the spiritually dead as well as to physically dead Lazarus. John goes on to note the reaction to this miracle: some believed, but some opposed Jesus (vv 45-57). He includes a notable saying of Caiaphas, the high priest, that one man should die for the people (vv 50-52). Caiaphas was speaking as a cynical politician (better one dead, however innocent, than the whole nation be troubled). But John saw in the words the deeper meaning that Jesus’ death would bring salvation to many.<\/p>\n<p>John rounds off his account of the ministry with the story of the anointing of Jesus by a woman in Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the coming of some Greeks to Jesus, and his final summary of what he had taught (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Last Supper<\/h5>\n<p>The account of what went on in the upper room on the night before the Crucifixion is the fullest of all the four Gospels. Curiously, John says nothing about the institution of Communion, a fact that has never been satisfactorily explained. But he tells us how Jesus washed the feet of the disciples (13:1-17), an action splendidly exemplifying the spirit of lowly service so soon to be shown on the cross. Then comes the prophecy of the betrayal, an action that set in motion the events that would lead to the cross (vv 18-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the long discourse that follows, Jesus dealt with some questions posed by his followers and went on to teach them some important truths, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). He develops the thought that he is the true vine, the disciples being vitally joined to him as branches to the vine. It is important for the branches to remain in the vine if they are to have life (15:1-16). Then come some words about suffering that would be of help to them in times of persecution (vv 17-25). Jesus goes on to speak about the Holy Spirit (15:26–16:15). This is a very important passage, for it contains much more about the Spirit than we find elsewhere in Jesus’ words. Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete,” a title not easy to understand. It is in origin a legal term, and at least we can say that it indicates that the Spirit brings friendship, encouragement, and help. Jesus went on to speak of his approaching departure from the disciples and to prepare them for the trying time ahead (16:16-33). This part of the Gospel concludes with Jesus’ great High Priestly prayer. He prayed for the disciples to be one, as he commended them to the care of the heavenly Father (ch 17).<\/p>\n<h5>The Cross and Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, he went forward to meet them and they fell to the ground (18:1-11). He gave himself over to them; they did not take him over. At the outset of his passion narrative, John was making the point that Jesus is sovereign. He was not being defeated by the march of events but was sovereignly doing the will of the Father. John is the only one to tell us that Jesus was taken before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, the reigning high priest (18:12-14, 19-24). He tells also of Peter’s three denials of Jesus (vv 15-27). He did not spend much time on the Jewish trial, but he was much more explicit than the other Evangelists in his account of the Roman trial. Clearly, he had some special knowledge of what went on before Pilate. He presents a magnificent picture of Jesus talking with Pilate about kingship—the Son of God discussing with the representative of Caesar the meaning of sovereignty (vv 33-40).<\/p>\n<p>In his account of the Crucifixion John has a number of touches of his own, notably the way Jesus commended Mary to the care of the beloved disciple (19:26-27), the fact that the cry Jesus uttered as he died was “It is finished” (v 30), and the piercing of his side by a soldier’s spear (vv 31-37).<\/p>\n<p>John proceeds to the narrative of the burial (vv 38-42) and of the empty tomb (20:1-10). He speaks of appearances of the risen Lord to Mary Magdalene (vv 11-18), and to the disciples—both without (vv 19-23) and with Thomas (vv 24-29).<\/p>\n<p>The final chapter, an epilogue, tells of a miraculous catch of fish (21:1-14) and goes on to the moving account of Peter’s threefold declaration of love to Jesus and his restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOHN, Gospel of The fourth Gospel. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospe...","summary_en":"JOHN, Gospel of The fourth Gospel. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospe...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":32270,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Rabbi","title_en":"Rabbi","content_ro":"<h3>RABBI<\/h3>\n<p>Title of respect, meaning “my great one” or “my superior one,” used in Jesus’ day for Jewish religious teachers.<\/p>\n<p>According to Matthew 23:7, “rabbi” was evidently used as a common title of address for the Jewish scribes and Pharisees. However, in the NT it is most commonly used as a title of respectful address when others were speaking to Jesus. It was used by Nathanael (Jn 1:49), by Peter and Andrew (v 38), by Nicodemus (3:2), by the disciples as a group (9:2; 11:8), and by a crowd generally (6:25). Mary Magdalene (Mk 10:51) and blind Bartimaeus (Jn 20:16) both use the longer form, “rabboni,” to address Jesus directly, thus indicating even more profound respect than the use of the shorter title “rabbi.” By the time of the writing of John’s Gospel, the title “rabbi” meant “teacher”; John explicitly states this in 1:38 and implicitly says this in 3:2.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus condemns the scribes and the Pharisees for their evident pride displayed in their love of being greeted in the marketplaces and their insistence on having people call them “rabbi” (Mt 23:7-8). Jesus prohibited the use of the title for his own disciples, saying, “You are not to be called rabbi.” However, Jesus’ prohibition was more against seeking to be called this and insisting on it than the legitimate possession of the title itself. In fact, when people did use the title of Jesus in a reverent way, they were not in any way rebuked.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>RABBI<\/h3>\n<p>Title of respect, meaning “my great one” or “my superior one,” used in Jesus’ day for Jewish religious teachers.<\/p>\n<p>According to Matthew 23:7, “rabbi” was evidently used as a common title of address for the Jewish scribes and Pharisees. However, in the NT it is most commonly used as a title of respectful address when others were speaking to Jesus. It was used by Nathanael (Jn 1:49), by Peter and Andrew (v 38), by Nicodemus (3:2), by the disciples as a group (9:2; 11:8), and by a crowd generally (6:25). Mary Magdalene (Mk 10:51) and blind Bartimaeus (Jn 20:16) both use the longer form, “rabboni,” to address Jesus directly, thus indicating even more profound respect than the use of the shorter title “rabbi.” By the time of the writing of John’s Gospel, the title “rabbi” meant “teacher”; John explicitly states this in 1:38 and implicitly says this in 3:2.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus condemns the scribes and the Pharisees for their evident pride displayed in their love of being greeted in the marketplaces and their insistence on having people call them “rabbi” (Mt 23:7-8). Jesus prohibited the use of the title for his own disciples, saying, “You are not to be called rabbi.” However, Jesus’ prohibition was more against seeking to be called this and insisting on it than the legitimate possession of the title itself. In fact, when people did use the title of Jesus in a reverent way, they were not in any way rebuked.<\/p>","summary_ro":"RABBI Title of respect, meaning “my great one” or “my superior one,” used in Jesus’ day for Jewish religious teachers. According to Matthew 23:7, “rabbi” was evidently used as a common title of address for the Jewish scribes and Pharisees. However, in the NT it is most commonly used as a title of respectful address when others were speaking to Jesus. It was used by Nathanael (Jn 1:49), by Peter and Andrew (v 38), by Nicodemus (3:2), by the disciples as a group (9:2; 11:8), and by a crowd gene...","summary_en":"RABBI Title of respect, meaning “my great one” or “my superior one,” used in Jesus’ day for Jewish religious teachers. According to Matthew 23:7, “rabbi” was evidently used as a common title of address for the Jewish scribes and Pharisees. However, in the NT it is most commonly used as a title of respectful address when others were speaking to Jesus. It was used by Nathanael (Jn 1:49), by Peter and Andrew (v 38), by Nicodemus (3:2), by the disciples as a group (9:2; 11:8), and by a crowd gene...","source":"Articles\/R.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65934,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","title_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","content_ro":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","summary_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93560,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","title_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","content_ro":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","summary_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121186,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","title_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","content_ro":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","summary_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148812,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","title_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","content_ro":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","summary_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"40":[{"id":42178,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69804,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97430,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125056,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":1583,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Andrew, the Apostle","title_en":"Andrew, the Apostle","content_ro":"<h3>ANDREW, T<span>he<\/span> A<span>postle<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>One of Christ’s 12 apostles. Andrew first appears in the NT as a disciple of John the Baptist (Jn 1:35, 40). After hearing John say, “Look, there is the Lamb of God!” (Jn 1:36), referring to Jesus, Andrew and another unnamed disciple followed Jesus and stayed with him for a day (Jn 1:36-39). Andrew then told his brother, Simon Peter, that he had found the Messiah and brought Peter to Jesus (Jn 1:40-42). From then on Andrew faded into the background, and his brother came into prominence. Whenever the relationship of the two is mentioned, Andrew is always described as the brother of Simon Peter and never the other way around (Mt 4:18; Mk 1:16; Jn 1:40; 6:8), although Andrew is also mentioned without reference to his relationship to Peter (Mk 1:29; 3:18; 13:3; Jn 12:22). Andrew’s father was John (Mt 16:17; Jn 1:42; 21:15-17), and his hometown was Bethsaida (Jn 1:44), a village on the north shore of the Sea of Galilee.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John mentions disciples being with Jesus (2:2; 4:2), and it is likely that Andrew was one of that early group. Evidently, however, he returned to his activity as a fisherman on the Sea of Galilee, where he shared a house with Peter and his family in Capernaum (Mt 4:18-20; Mk 1:16-18, 29-33). While they were fishing, Andrew and Peter received a definite call to follow Jesus and become those who fish for people. From among the disciples of Jesus a group of 12 were later specially chosen as apostles. Andrew is always listed among the first four named, along with Peter and two other brothers, John and James (Mt 10:2-4; Lk 6:13-16; Acts 1:13).<\/p>\n<p>Andrew is named in only three other contexts in the Gospels. At the feeding of the 5,000 he called attention to the boy who had five barley loaves and two fish (Jn 6:8-9). When certain Greeks came to Philip, asking to see Jesus, Philip told Andrew and then the two of them told Jesus (Jn 12:20-22). Finally, Andrew is listed among those who were questioning Jesus privately on the Mt of Olives (Mk 13:3-4). The last NT mention of Andrew is in the list of apostles waiting in the upper room in Jerusalem for the promised outpouring of the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:12-14).<\/p>\n<p>Various documents associated with Andrew, such as the Acts of Andrew mentioned by the early church historian Eusebius, are of doubtful value. Some traditions indicate that Andrew ministered in Scythia. According to the Muratorian Canon, Andrew received a revelation at night that the apostle John should write the fourth Gospel. Tradition is rather uniform that Andrew died at Patrae in Achaia. A story developed that he was martyred on an X-shaped cross (a “decussate” or “saltire” cross), which has become known as St Andrew’s Cross. Another tradition is that an arm of the dead Andrew was taken into Scotland as a relic by Regulus, and thus Andrew became known as a patron saint of Scotland. On the calendar of saints of the Roman and Greek churches, Andrew’s date is set as November 30. <em>See<\/em> Apocrypha (Specific Titles of Apocryphal Writings): Andrew, Acts of; Andrew, Story of; Andrew and Matthias, Acts of; Andrew and Paul, Acts of.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Apostle, Apostleship.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ANDREW, T<span>he<\/span> A<span>postle<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>One of Christ’s 12 apostles. Andrew first appears in the NT as a disciple of John the Baptist (Jn 1:35, 40). After hearing John say, “Look, there is the Lamb of God!” (Jn 1:36), referring to Jesus, Andrew and another unnamed disciple followed Jesus and stayed with him for a day (Jn 1:36-39). Andrew then told his brother, Simon Peter, that he had found the Messiah and brought Peter to Jesus (Jn 1:40-42). From then on Andrew faded into the background, and his brother came into prominence. Whenever the relationship of the two is mentioned, Andrew is always described as the brother of Simon Peter and never the other way around (Mt 4:18; Mk 1:16; Jn 1:40; 6:8), although Andrew is also mentioned without reference to his relationship to Peter (Mk 1:29; 3:18; 13:3; Jn 12:22). Andrew’s father was John (Mt 16:17; Jn 1:42; 21:15-17), and his hometown was Bethsaida (Jn 1:44), a village on the north shore of the Sea of Galilee.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John mentions disciples being with Jesus (2:2; 4:2), and it is likely that Andrew was one of that early group. Evidently, however, he returned to his activity as a fisherman on the Sea of Galilee, where he shared a house with Peter and his family in Capernaum (Mt 4:18-20; Mk 1:16-18, 29-33). While they were fishing, Andrew and Peter received a definite call to follow Jesus and become those who fish for people. From among the disciples of Jesus a group of 12 were later specially chosen as apostles. Andrew is always listed among the first four named, along with Peter and two other brothers, John and James (Mt 10:2-4; Lk 6:13-16; Acts 1:13).<\/p>\n<p>Andrew is named in only three other contexts in the Gospels. At the feeding of the 5,000 he called attention to the boy who had five barley loaves and two fish (Jn 6:8-9). When certain Greeks came to Philip, asking to see Jesus, Philip told Andrew and then the two of them told Jesus (Jn 12:20-22). Finally, Andrew is listed among those who were questioning Jesus privately on the Mt of Olives (Mk 13:3-4). The last NT mention of Andrew is in the list of apostles waiting in the upper room in Jerusalem for the promised outpouring of the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:12-14).<\/p>\n<p>Various documents associated with Andrew, such as the Acts of Andrew mentioned by the early church historian Eusebius, are of doubtful value. Some traditions indicate that Andrew ministered in Scythia. According to the Muratorian Canon, Andrew received a revelation at night that the apostle John should write the fourth Gospel. Tradition is rather uniform that Andrew died at Patrae in Achaia. A story developed that he was martyred on an X-shaped cross (a “decussate” or “saltire” cross), which has become known as St Andrew’s Cross. Another tradition is that an arm of the dead Andrew was taken into Scotland as a relic by Regulus, and thus Andrew became known as a patron saint of Scotland. On the calendar of saints of the Roman and Greek churches, Andrew’s date is set as November 30. <em>See<\/em> Apocrypha (Specific Titles of Apocryphal Writings): Andrew, Acts of; Andrew, Story of; Andrew and Matthias, Acts of; Andrew and Paul, Acts of.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Apostle, Apostleship.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ANDREW, The Apostle One of Christ’s 12 apostles. Andrew first appears in the NT as a disciple of John the Baptist (Jn 1:35, 40). After hearing John say, “Look, there is the Lamb of God!” (Jn 1:36), referring to Jesus, Andrew and another unnamed disciple followed Jesus and stayed with him for a day (Jn 1:36-39). Andrew then told his brother, Simon Peter, that he had found the Messiah and brought Peter to Jesus (Jn 1:40-42). From then on Andrew faded into the background, and his brother came in...","summary_en":"ANDREW, The Apostle One of Christ’s 12 apostles. Andrew first appears in the NT as a disciple of John the Baptist (Jn 1:35, 40). After hearing John say, “Look, there is the Lamb of God!” (Jn 1:36), referring to Jesus, Andrew and another unnamed disciple followed Jesus and stayed with him for a day (Jn 1:36-39). Andrew then told his brother, Simon Peter, that he had found the Messiah and brought Peter to Jesus (Jn 1:40-42). From then on Andrew faded into the background, and his brother came in...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20113,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"John (Person)","title_en":"John (Person)","content_ro":"<h3>JOHN (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li> 1. Father of Simon Peter and Andrew (Jn 1:40-42; 21:15-17). According to Matthew 16:17, Peter’s father was named Jona (Jonas, Jonah). Either Jona was an alternate form of the name John or, more probably, two independent traditions existed regarding his name.<\/li>\n<li> 2. Member of the high priestly family who, along with Annas, Caiaphas, and Alexander, questioned Peter and John after the two apostles had healed a lame man (Acts 4:6).<\/li>\n<li> 3. According to the early church bishop Papias, a member of the larger group of Jesus’ disciples outside the Twelve (cf. Lk 10:1). Known as “John the elder” (the presbyter), he is often credited with the authorship of 2 and 3 John (2 Jn 1:1; 3 Jn 1:1), although the term “elder” there more likely refers to John the apostle.<\/li>\n<li> 4. The apostle. <em>See<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/li>\n<li>5. The Baptist. <em>See<\/em> John the Baptist.<\/li>\n<li>6. An early disciple known as John Mark, author of the second Gospel. <em>See<\/em> Mark, John.<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>JOHN (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li> 1. Father of Simon Peter and Andrew (Jn 1:40-42; 21:15-17). According to Matthew 16:17, Peter’s father was named Jona (Jonas, Jonah). Either Jona was an alternate form of the name John or, more probably, two independent traditions existed regarding his name.<\/li>\n<li> 2. Member of the high priestly family who, along with Annas, Caiaphas, and Alexander, questioned Peter and John after the two apostles had healed a lame man (Acts 4:6).<\/li>\n<li> 3. According to the early church bishop Papias, a member of the larger group of Jesus’ disciples outside the Twelve (cf. Lk 10:1). Known as “John the elder” (the presbyter), he is often credited with the authorship of 2 and 3 John (2 Jn 1:1; 3 Jn 1:1), although the term “elder” there more likely refers to John the apostle.<\/li>\n<li> 4. The apostle. <em>See<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/li>\n<li>5. The Baptist. <em>See<\/em> John the Baptist.<\/li>\n<li>6. An early disciple known as John Mark, author of the second Gospel. <em>See<\/em> Mark, John.<\/li>","summary_ro":"JOHN (Person) 1. Father of Simon Peter and Andrew (Jn 1:40-42; 21:15-17). According to Matthew 16:17, Peter’s father was named Jona (Jonas, Jonah). Either Jona was an alternate form of the name John or, more probably, two independent traditions existed regarding his name. 2. Member of the high priestly family who, along with Annas, Caiaphas, and Alexander, questioned Peter and John after the two apostles had healed a lame man (Acts 4:6). 3. According to the early church bishop Papias, a membe...","summary_en":"JOHN (Person) 1. Father of Simon Peter and Andrew (Jn 1:40-42; 21:15-17). According to Matthew 16:17, Peter’s father was named Jona (Jonas, Jonah). Either Jona was an alternate form of the name John or, more probably, two independent traditions existed regarding his name. 2. Member of the high priestly family who, along with Annas, Caiaphas, and Alexander, questioned Peter and John after the two apostles had healed a lame man (Acts 4:6). 3. According to the early church bishop Papias, a membe...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":35436,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Simon","title_en":"Simon","content_ro":"<h3>SIMON<\/h3>\n<p>Greek form of a Hebrew\/Aramaic name meaning “God has heard.” Nine men in the NT had this name:<\/p>\n<p>1. Son of Jona (Mt 16:17) or John (Jn 1:42), Andrew’s brother (v 40), and surnamed Cephas and Peter (respectively Aramaic and Greek, for “rock,” v 42) by Jesus. A fisherman of Bethsaida (Mk 1:16; Jn 1:44), he became an apostle of Jesus and author of two NT letters bearing his name. <em>See<\/em> Peter, The Apostle.<\/p>\n<li>2. Brother of Jesus, named with other brothers, James, Joses or Joseph, and Judas (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3).<\/li>\n<li>3. Leper, perhaps cured by Jesus, in whose house at Bethany Jesus and his disciples were eating when a woman poured an alabaster flask of costly ointment on the Lord’s head. Over the disciples’ objections against the waste of what could have been sold to support the poor, Jesus commended the act as a wonderful thing (Mt 26:6-13; Mk 14:3-9). From John 12:1-8 it appears that Simon’s house was also the house of Mary, Martha, and Lazarus, but their relationship to Simon is uncertain.<\/li>\n<li>4. Man of Cyrene, a district of North Africa, whom the Romans forced to carry Jesus’ cross (Mt 27:32; Mk 15:21; Lk 23:26). He was the father of Alexander and Rufus (Mk 15:21; cf. Rom 16:13).<\/li>\n<li>5. Apostle of Jesus called a Zealot (Lk 6:15), presumably because of prior association either with the party of political extremists by that name, who adopted terrorism to oppose the Roman occupation of Palestine, or with one of a number of Jewish groups noted for their zeal for the law. In Matthew 10:4 and Mark 3:18 he is designated the “Cananaean” (<span>rsv<\/span>)—from the Aramaic word for “zealot.” He is mentioned again in Acts 1:13 as one of the 11 apostles in Jerusalem after Jesus’ ascension. Otherwise, the NT is silent about him.<\/li>\n<li>6. Pharisee whose treatment of Jesus evoked the parable of the two debtors (Lk 7:36-50). He invited Jesus to eat at his house but withheld courtesies customary for guests and disapproved of Jesus’ acceptance of a “sinner” woman who wet the Lord’s feet with her tears, dried them with her hair, and anointed them with ointment from an alabaster flask. Jesus’ parable contrasted the woman’s act of loving and repentant faith with Simon’s unloving and self-righteous skepticism.<\/li>\n<li>7. Father of Judas Iscariot, the disciple who betrayed Jesus in Gethsemane (Jn 6:71; 13:2, 26).<\/li>\n<li>8. Magician (often called Simon Magus) of great repute in Samaria. Impressed by the signs and miracles performed by Philip the deacon-become-evangelist, he joined the crowd of baptized believers. He offered Peter and John money in exchange for the gift of the Holy Spirit, provoking Peter’s emphatic rebuke (Acts 8:9-24). From the association of this incident with his name, the English word “simony” is derived; it denotes the sale or purchase of church positions, or any profiteering from sacred things.<\/li>\n<li>9. Tanner of Joppa. Peter lodged at his house for many days (Acts 9:43; 10:6, 17, 32). On Simon’s housetop, Peter experienced the vision of a great sheet let down from heaven, containing animals and birds prohibited as food in Jewish law (10:15). Peter later recognized this vision as his preparation for consenting to preach the gospel to the Gentiles (vv 28-29).<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>SIMON<\/h3>\n<p>Greek form of a Hebrew\/Aramaic name meaning “God has heard.” Nine men in the NT had this name:<\/p>\n<p>1. Son of Jona (Mt 16:17) or John (Jn 1:42), Andrew’s brother (v 40), and surnamed Cephas and Peter (respectively Aramaic and Greek, for “rock,” v 42) by Jesus. A fisherman of Bethsaida (Mk 1:16; Jn 1:44), he became an apostle of Jesus and author of two NT letters bearing his name. <em>See<\/em> Peter, The Apostle.<\/p>\n<li>2. Brother of Jesus, named with other brothers, James, Joses or Joseph, and Judas (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3).<\/li>\n<li>3. Leper, perhaps cured by Jesus, in whose house at Bethany Jesus and his disciples were eating when a woman poured an alabaster flask of costly ointment on the Lord’s head. Over the disciples’ objections against the waste of what could have been sold to support the poor, Jesus commended the act as a wonderful thing (Mt 26:6-13; Mk 14:3-9). From John 12:1-8 it appears that Simon’s house was also the house of Mary, Martha, and Lazarus, but their relationship to Simon is uncertain.<\/li>\n<li>4. Man of Cyrene, a district of North Africa, whom the Romans forced to carry Jesus’ cross (Mt 27:32; Mk 15:21; Lk 23:26). He was the father of Alexander and Rufus (Mk 15:21; cf. Rom 16:13).<\/li>\n<li>5. Apostle of Jesus called a Zealot (Lk 6:15), presumably because of prior association either with the party of political extremists by that name, who adopted terrorism to oppose the Roman occupation of Palestine, or with one of a number of Jewish groups noted for their zeal for the law. In Matthew 10:4 and Mark 3:18 he is designated the “Cananaean” (<span>rsv<\/span>)—from the Aramaic word for “zealot.” He is mentioned again in Acts 1:13 as one of the 11 apostles in Jerusalem after Jesus’ ascension. Otherwise, the NT is silent about him.<\/li>\n<li>6. Pharisee whose treatment of Jesus evoked the parable of the two debtors (Lk 7:36-50). He invited Jesus to eat at his house but withheld courtesies customary for guests and disapproved of Jesus’ acceptance of a “sinner” woman who wet the Lord’s feet with her tears, dried them with her hair, and anointed them with ointment from an alabaster flask. Jesus’ parable contrasted the woman’s act of loving and repentant faith with Simon’s unloving and self-righteous skepticism.<\/li>\n<li>7. Father of Judas Iscariot, the disciple who betrayed Jesus in Gethsemane (Jn 6:71; 13:2, 26).<\/li>\n<li>8. Magician (often called Simon Magus) of great repute in Samaria. Impressed by the signs and miracles performed by Philip the deacon-become-evangelist, he joined the crowd of baptized believers. He offered Peter and John money in exchange for the gift of the Holy Spirit, provoking Peter’s emphatic rebuke (Acts 8:9-24). From the association of this incident with his name, the English word “simony” is derived; it denotes the sale or purchase of church positions, or any profiteering from sacred things.<\/li>\n<li>9. Tanner of Joppa. Peter lodged at his house for many days (Acts 9:43; 10:6, 17, 32). On Simon’s housetop, Peter experienced the vision of a great sheet let down from heaven, containing animals and birds prohibited as food in Jewish law (10:15). Peter later recognized this vision as his preparation for consenting to preach the gospel to the Gentiles (vv 28-29).<\/li>","summary_ro":"SIMON Greek form of a Hebrew\/Aramaic name meaning “God has heard.” Nine men in the NT had this name: 1. Son of Jona (Mt 16:17) or John (Jn 1:42), Andrew’s brother (v 40), and surnamed Cephas and Peter (respectively Aramaic and Greek, for “rock,” v 42) by Jesus. A fisherman of Bethsaida (Mk 1:16; Jn 1:44), he became an apostle of Jesus and author of two NT letters bearing his name. See Peter, The Apostle. 2. Brother of Jesus, named with other brothers, James, Joses or Joseph, and Judas (Mt 13:...","summary_en":"SIMON Greek form of a Hebrew\/Aramaic name meaning “God has heard.” Nine men in the NT had this name: 1. Son of Jona (Mt 16:17) or John (Jn 1:42), Andrew’s brother (v 40), and surnamed Cephas and Peter (respectively Aramaic and Greek, for “rock,” v 42) by Jesus. A fisherman of Bethsaida (Mk 1:16; Jn 1:44), he became an apostle of Jesus and author of two NT letters bearing his name. See Peter, The Apostle. 2. Brother of Jesus, named with other brothers, James, Joses or Joseph, and Judas (Mt 13:...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56332,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:40","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:40","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:40-42<\/strong> Simon is well known in the Gospels, not for his courage and faith, but for his failings (see 18:15-18, 25-27). Jesus named him <em>Cephas<\/em> (“the rock”), referring to the great church leader he would later become (see Acts 1:1–5:42; 8:1–12:25; 15:1-41).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:40-42<\/strong> Simon is well known in the Gospels, not for his courage and faith, but for his failings (see 18:15-18, 25-27). Jesus named him <em>Cephas<\/em> (“the rock”), referring to the great church leader he would later become (see Acts 1:1–5:42; 8:1–12:25; 15:1-41).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:40-42 Simon is well known in the Gospels, not for his courage and faith, but for his failings (see 18:15-18, 25-27). Jesus named him Cephas (“the rock”), referring to the great church leader he would later become (see Acts 1:1–5:42; 8:1–12:25; 15:1-41).","summary_en":"1:40-42 Simon is well known in the Gospels, not for his courage and faith, but for his failings (see 18:15-18, 25-27). Jesus named him Cephas (“the rock”), referring to the great church leader he would later become (see Acts 1:1–5:42; 8:1–12:25; 15:1-41).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83958,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:40","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:40","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:40-42<\/strong> Simon is well known in the Gospels, not for his courage and faith, but for his failings (see 18:15-18, 25-27). Jesus named him <em>Cephas<\/em> (“the rock”), referring to the great church leader he would later become (see Acts 1:1–5:42; 8:1–12:25; 15:1-41).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:40-42<\/strong> Simon is well known in the Gospels, not for his courage and faith, but for his failings (see 18:15-18, 25-27). Jesus named him <em>Cephas<\/em> (“the rock”), referring to the great church leader he would later become (see Acts 1:1–5:42; 8:1–12:25; 15:1-41).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:40-42 Simon is well known in the Gospels, not for his courage and faith, but for his failings (see 18:15-18, 25-27). Jesus named him Cephas (“the rock”), referring to the great church leader he would later become (see Acts 1:1–5:42; 8:1–12:25; 15:1-41).","summary_en":"1:40-42 Simon is well known in the Gospels, not for his courage and faith, but for his failings (see 18:15-18, 25-27). Jesus named him Cephas (“the rock”), referring to the great church leader he would later become (see Acts 1:1–5:42; 8:1–12:25; 15:1-41).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111584,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:40","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:40","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:40-42<\/strong> Simon is well known in the Gospels, not for his courage and faith, but for his failings (see 18:15-18, 25-27). Jesus named him <em>Cephas<\/em> (“the rock”), referring to the great church leader he would later become (see Acts 1:1–5:42; 8:1–12:25; 15:1-41).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:40-42<\/strong> Simon is well known in the Gospels, not for his courage and faith, but for his failings (see 18:15-18, 25-27). Jesus named him <em>Cephas<\/em> (“the rock”), referring to the great church leader he would later become (see Acts 1:1–5:42; 8:1–12:25; 15:1-41).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:40-42 Simon is well known in the Gospels, not for his courage and faith, but for his failings (see 18:15-18, 25-27). Jesus named him Cephas (“the rock”), referring to the great church leader he would later become (see Acts 1:1–5:42; 8:1–12:25; 15:1-41).","summary_en":"1:40-42 Simon is well known in the Gospels, not for his courage and faith, but for his failings (see 18:15-18, 25-27). Jesus named him Cephas (“the rock”), referring to the great church leader he would later become (see Acts 1:1–5:42; 8:1–12:25; 15:1-41).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139210,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:40","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:40","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:40-42<\/strong> Simon is well known in the Gospels, not for his courage and faith, but for his failings (see 18:15-18, 25-27). Jesus named him <em>Cephas<\/em> (“the rock”), referring to the great church leader he would later become (see Acts 1:1–5:42; 8:1–12:25; 15:1-41).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>1:40-42<\/strong> Simon is well known in the Gospels, not for his courage and faith, but for his failings (see 18:15-18, 25-27). Jesus named him <em>Cephas<\/em> (“the rock”), referring to the great church leader he would later become (see Acts 1:1–5:42; 8:1–12:25; 15:1-41).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:40-42 Simon is well known in the Gospels, not for his courage and faith, but for his failings (see 18:15-18, 25-27). Jesus named him Cephas (“the rock”), referring to the great church leader he would later become (see Acts 1:1–5:42; 8:1–12:25; 15:1-41).","summary_en":"1:40-42 Simon is well known in the Gospels, not for his courage and faith, but for his failings (see 18:15-18, 25-27). Jesus named him Cephas (“the rock”), referring to the great church leader he would later become (see Acts 1:1–5:42; 8:1–12:25; 15:1-41).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"41":[{"id":5764,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Brother","title_en":"Brother","content_ro":"<h3>BROTHER<\/h3>\n<p>Man or boy in his relationship to the other children of his parents; also a close male friend or fellow member of the same race, creed, profession, organization, and the like; a kinsman.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the Hebrew word translated “brother” describes the relationship between male children who have at least one parent in common. Joseph and Benjamin were children of Jacob and Rachel (Gn 35:24), but the other sons born to Jacob are also called Joseph’s brothers (42:6). The love Joseph had for Benjamin is not always found between brothers. Cain killed his brother Abel (4:8), and Esau hated his brother, Jacob (27:41). A brother may be a bad influence (Dt 13:6-7), but ideally he is one who helps in times of need (Prv 17:17). The law of levirate marriage required that if a man died leaving a childless widow, the man’s brother had to raise up children through her to perpetuate the family name (Dt 25:5).<\/p>\n<p>David spoke affectionately of his “brother” Jonathan, although they were not related (2 Sm 1:26). A fellow Israelite could be called brother. The relationship required certain obligations: money could not be loaned to a brother at interest, and a brother could not be enslaved (Lv 25:35-43).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the Greek word is used to describe natural brothers, such as Andrew and Peter (Jn 1:41). Four brothers of Jesus are named (Mk 6:3). (The Roman Catholic view is that they were really Jesus’ cousins, but the Greek language has several words for cousin, and the word “brother” is used here; thus, it refers either to children or foster children of Mary and Joseph.) Jesus’ brothers did not believe in him at first (Jn 7:5), but after the resurrection they were meeting with the Christian community (Acts 1:14). Jesus taught that his disciples had one Father (God) and were therefore brothers (Mt 23:8-9), and he graciously identified himself with the disciples as their brother (28:10).<\/p>\n<p>Early in the history of the church it became customary for Christians to address one another as brother (Acts 9:17; Col 1:1); on two occasions the Christian community is called “the brotherhood” (1 Pt 2:17; 5:9, <span>rsv<\/span>). Specific duties and responsibilities accompany Christian brotherhood. A Christian’s love for his brother will be demonstrated in the restraint of sexual passions (1 Thes 4:6), provision of material goods when needed (Jas 2:15-16), and determination not to offend (Rom 14:13). A Christian must not “go to law” against a brother (1 Cor 6:5-6), but brothers must resolve their problems either personally or within the church group (Mt 18:15-17). The relationship between Christians is significant because a Christian cannot offer worship to God if he is out of harmony with his brother (Mt 5:23-24).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Family Life and Relations; Brothers (and Sisters).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BROTHER<\/h3>\n<p>Man or boy in his relationship to the other children of his parents; also a close male friend or fellow member of the same race, creed, profession, organization, and the like; a kinsman.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the Hebrew word translated “brother” describes the relationship between male children who have at least one parent in common. Joseph and Benjamin were children of Jacob and Rachel (Gn 35:24), but the other sons born to Jacob are also called Joseph’s brothers (42:6). The love Joseph had for Benjamin is not always found between brothers. Cain killed his brother Abel (4:8), and Esau hated his brother, Jacob (27:41). A brother may be a bad influence (Dt 13:6-7), but ideally he is one who helps in times of need (Prv 17:17). The law of levirate marriage required that if a man died leaving a childless widow, the man’s brother had to raise up children through her to perpetuate the family name (Dt 25:5).<\/p>\n<p>David spoke affectionately of his “brother” Jonathan, although they were not related (2 Sm 1:26). A fellow Israelite could be called brother. The relationship required certain obligations: money could not be loaned to a brother at interest, and a brother could not be enslaved (Lv 25:35-43).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the Greek word is used to describe natural brothers, such as Andrew and Peter (Jn 1:41). Four brothers of Jesus are named (Mk 6:3). (The Roman Catholic view is that they were really Jesus’ cousins, but the Greek language has several words for cousin, and the word “brother” is used here; thus, it refers either to children or foster children of Mary and Joseph.) Jesus’ brothers did not believe in him at first (Jn 7:5), but after the resurrection they were meeting with the Christian community (Acts 1:14). Jesus taught that his disciples had one Father (God) and were therefore brothers (Mt 23:8-9), and he graciously identified himself with the disciples as their brother (28:10).<\/p>\n<p>Early in the history of the church it became customary for Christians to address one another as brother (Acts 9:17; Col 1:1); on two occasions the Christian community is called “the brotherhood” (1 Pt 2:17; 5:9, <span>rsv<\/span>). Specific duties and responsibilities accompany Christian brotherhood. A Christian’s love for his brother will be demonstrated in the restraint of sexual passions (1 Thes 4:6), provision of material goods when needed (Jas 2:15-16), and determination not to offend (Rom 14:13). A Christian must not “go to law” against a brother (1 Cor 6:5-6), but brothers must resolve their problems either personally or within the church group (Mt 18:15-17). The relationship between Christians is significant because a Christian cannot offer worship to God if he is out of harmony with his brother (Mt 5:23-24).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Family Life and Relations; Brothers (and Sisters).<\/p>","summary_ro":"BROTHER Man or boy in his relationship to the other children of his parents; also a close male friend or fellow member of the same race, creed, profession, organization, and the like; a kinsman. In the OT the Hebrew word translated “brother” describes the relationship between male children who have at least one parent in common. Joseph and Benjamin were children of Jacob and Rachel (Gn 35:24), but the other sons born to Jacob are also called Joseph’s brothers (42:6). The love Joseph had for B...","summary_en":"BROTHER Man or boy in his relationship to the other children of his parents; also a close male friend or fellow member of the same race, creed, profession, organization, and the like; a kinsman. In the OT the Hebrew word translated “brother” describes the relationship between male children who have at least one parent in common. Joseph and Benjamin were children of Jacob and Rachel (Gn 35:24), but the other sons born to Jacob are also called Joseph’s brothers (42:6). The love Joseph had for B...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":6300,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Christ","title_en":"Christ","content_ro":"<h3>CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Official title given to Jesus in the NT. It signifies his office as anointed Savior and alludes to his spiritual qualifications for the task of saving his people. The word derives from Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Christos<\/span><em>,<\/em> which translates Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Messiah<\/span> (Jn 1:41). Both terms come from verbs meaning “to anoint with sacred oil”; hence, as titles they mean “the Anointed One.” Applied to Jesus, they express the conviction that he had divine appointment for his office and function.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the title is used in combination with the given name, as “Jesus Christ” (Mt 1:1; Mk 1:1; Rom 1:4), “Christ Jesus” (<span>niv<\/span> Rom 1:1; 1 Cor 1:1), with the article “the” (Rom 7:4), or with another title “Lord” (Rom 16:18). It is also used alone as the one favored substitute name or title for Jesus (Jn 20:31; Rom 15:3; Heb 3:6; 5:5; 1 Pt 1:11, 19).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels portray Jesus as modestly accepting the title and role of the Messiah. His baptism should be understood as his anointing to the threefold office of prophet, priest, and king. At his baptism by John (the new Elijah, Mt 11:14), Jesus received the outpouring of the Spirit and God’s mandate to begin his ministry (Mt 3:16–4:17). John himself denied being the anointed one but tacitly identified Jesus as the Christ (Jn 1:20; Lk 3:14-17). Jesus’ first disciples followed him because they knew he was the Messiah (Jn 1:41). The demons recognized him as “the Holy One [anointed] of God” (Mk 1:24; cf. Mt 8:29). The crowds followed him as the Prophet, the new Moses (Jn 6:14, 32), but deserted him when they understood that his kingdom was a spiritual, not a political realm (v 66). The Twelve remained loyal, saying, “We believe . . . you are the Holy One of God” (Jn 6:69, <span>niv<\/span>). The confession of the disciples voiced by Peter and approved by Jesus as a divine revelation is “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Mt 16:16, <span>niv<\/span>). At his trials the decisive factor in Jesus’ condemnation was his claim to be the Christ (Mt 26:63-64, 68; 27:11, 17, 22, 37).<\/p>\n<p>An important feature in the earliest Christian preaching was the proclamation that Jesus is the Christ (Acts 2:36; 3:18-20; 9:22; 28:23, 31). This remains the earliest (Mt 16:16) and most basic article of Christian confession (1 Cor 1:23; 1 Jn 5:1), affirming that Jesus perfectly fulfilled the role of anointed prophet, priest, and king as the servant of God for his people (Lk 7:16; 1 Cor 15:25; Heb 7:22-28; Rv 19:16).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Messiah.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Official title given to Jesus in the NT. It signifies his office as anointed Savior and alludes to his spiritual qualifications for the task of saving his people. The word derives from Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Christos<\/span><em>,<\/em> which translates Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Messiah<\/span> (Jn 1:41). Both terms come from verbs meaning “to anoint with sacred oil”; hence, as titles they mean “the Anointed One.” Applied to Jesus, they express the conviction that he had divine appointment for his office and function.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the title is used in combination with the given name, as “Jesus Christ” (Mt 1:1; Mk 1:1; Rom 1:4), “Christ Jesus” (<span>niv<\/span> Rom 1:1; 1 Cor 1:1), with the article “the” (Rom 7:4), or with another title “Lord” (Rom 16:18). It is also used alone as the one favored substitute name or title for Jesus (Jn 20:31; Rom 15:3; Heb 3:6; 5:5; 1 Pt 1:11, 19).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels portray Jesus as modestly accepting the title and role of the Messiah. His baptism should be understood as his anointing to the threefold office of prophet, priest, and king. At his baptism by John (the new Elijah, Mt 11:14), Jesus received the outpouring of the Spirit and God’s mandate to begin his ministry (Mt 3:16–4:17). John himself denied being the anointed one but tacitly identified Jesus as the Christ (Jn 1:20; Lk 3:14-17). Jesus’ first disciples followed him because they knew he was the Messiah (Jn 1:41). The demons recognized him as “the Holy One [anointed] of God” (Mk 1:24; cf. Mt 8:29). The crowds followed him as the Prophet, the new Moses (Jn 6:14, 32), but deserted him when they understood that his kingdom was a spiritual, not a political realm (v 66). The Twelve remained loyal, saying, “We believe . . . you are the Holy One of God” (Jn 6:69, <span>niv<\/span>). The confession of the disciples voiced by Peter and approved by Jesus as a divine revelation is “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Mt 16:16, <span>niv<\/span>). At his trials the decisive factor in Jesus’ condemnation was his claim to be the Christ (Mt 26:63-64, 68; 27:11, 17, 22, 37).<\/p>\n<p>An important feature in the earliest Christian preaching was the proclamation that Jesus is the Christ (Acts 2:36; 3:18-20; 9:22; 28:23, 31). This remains the earliest (Mt 16:16) and most basic article of Christian confession (1 Cor 1:23; 1 Jn 5:1), affirming that Jesus perfectly fulfilled the role of anointed prophet, priest, and king as the servant of God for his people (Lk 7:16; 1 Cor 15:25; Heb 7:22-28; Rv 19:16).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Messiah.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CHRIST Official title given to Jesus in the NT. It signifies his office as anointed Savior and alludes to his spiritual qualifications for the task of saving his people. The word derives from Greek Christos, which translates Hebrew Messiah (Jn 1:41). Both terms come from verbs meaning “to anoint with sacred oil”; hence, as titles they mean “the Anointed One.” Applied to Jesus, they express the conviction that he had divine appointment for his office and function. In the NT the title is used i...","summary_en":"CHRIST Official title given to Jesus in the NT. It signifies his office as anointed Savior and alludes to his spiritual qualifications for the task of saving his people. The word derives from Greek Christos, which translates Hebrew Messiah (Jn 1:41). Both terms come from verbs meaning “to anoint with sacred oil”; hence, as titles they mean “the Anointed One.” Applied to Jesus, they express the conviction that he had divine appointment for his office and function. In the NT the title is used i...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19439,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jesus Christ","title_en":"Jesus Christ","content_ro":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","summary_en":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19621,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Teachings of Jesus Christ","title_en":"Teachings of Jesus Christ","content_ro":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of<\/h3>\n<p>Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? What did he mean when he spoke about the kingdom? What light does his teaching throw on the meaning of his death? What did he say about the Holy Spirit? How did he describe human beings and their needs? Did he anticipate the Christian church? Did he teach anything about the end of the world? What were the main features of his moral teaching? The following sections will seek to answer these important questions.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutGod\">Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>Anyone who comes to the teachings of Jesus after reading the OT will at once recognize that much of his teaching about God is the same. Since Jesus, as all orthodox Jews of his day, accepted the testimony of the OT as inspired, it is not surprising that his approach to God was similar. This is especially true of his assumption that God was Creator. He taught a special providential care over the created order and affirmed that God watched over such small creatures as the sparrow (Mt 10:29). There is no support in the teachings of Jesus for the view that God is uninterested in the world he made.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic titles Jesus used for God was Father. This was not new, for the idea occurs in the OT, where God is seen as Father of his people Israel. This kind of fatherhood was national rather than personal. In the intertestamental period the Jews came to regard God as so holy that he was removed from direct contact with human affairs. There had to be mediators between God and people. This exalted notion of God was not conducive to the idea of God as Father, and it is against this background that the uniqueness of the personal fatherhood of God in the teaching of Jesus must be seen. There is some evidence in Judaism that prayer to God as “Our Father” was known, but what distinguishes Jesus’ teachings from that of his contemporaries is that the fatherhood of God was central to what he taught.<\/p>\n<p>The father-son relationship is particularly vivid in John’s Gospel, where Jesus as Son is seen to be in close communion with God as Father. This comes out strongly in Jesus’ prayer in John 17 and in the frequent assertions that the Father had sent the Son and that the Son was doing the will of the Father. It is this strong relationship between God and Jesus in terms of fatherhood and sonship that led Jesus to teach men to approach God in the same way. The Lord’s Prayer at once recognizes this in its opening words. It is particularly important to note that “Our Father” precedes “hallowed be thy name,” for the more intimate idea prepares the way for the more remote. Jesus never taught men to approach God with terror.<\/p>\n<p>Although there is a connection between the way in which Jesus addressed God as Father and the way in which he taught his disciples to approach God, there is also a distinction. Jesus spoke of “my Father and your Father” when he appeared to Mary Magdalene after his resurrection (Jn 20:17), but he did not say “our Father.” His sonship was unique, for he claimed that he and the Father were one (Jn 10:30).<\/p>\n<p>In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus assured his followers that their heavenly Father knows about their needs (Mt 6:32; Lk 12:30), on the strength of which they are exhorted not to be anxious. This gives some insight into the way in which Jesus’ teachings about God has a bearing on practical issues.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHimself\">Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>What Jesus said about himself is of great importance, for this undoubtedly formed the basis of what the early church came to teach about him.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used certain titles of himself or accepted them as descriptions of himself when they were used by others. The most widely used is Son of Man. This title was used by Jesus to refer to himself but was not used by anyone else. It was used, moreover, in several different kinds of sayings. Sometimes the sayings related directly to the public ministry of Jesus, like the saying that the Son of Man was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28), or that the Son of Man had authority to forgive sins (v 10). Sometimes the sayings had a direct bearing on the Passion, as when Jesus said that the Son of Man must suffer many things (Mk 8:31; note that Mt 16:21 has “he” instead of “Son of Man”). At other times the reference is to a future appearance, as when Jesus declared to the high priest that he would see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven (Mk 14:62). What did Jesus mean by the title, and why did he use it?<\/p>\n<p>The title “Son of Man” had been used before. The phrase occurs in Psalm 8:4, where it refers to man or humans. Again, the expression is used many times in Ezekiel as a mode of address to the prophet, but here also it means man. A rather different use occurs in Daniel 7:13, where one like a son of man comes with the clouds before the Ancient of Days. There is a strong similarity between this passage and the words of Jesus in Mark 14:62. But an important difference is that whereas Son of Man becomes a title in Mark, it is not so in Daniel. There is some evidence for the title in Jewish apocalyptic literature (e.g., in the Similitudes of Enoch), where it represents a preexistent being who will come to judge and overthrow the enemies of God. It seems evident from this that Jesus’ use of Son of Man as a title is unique.<\/p>\n<p>The Son of Man sayings are distributed throughout the four Gospels, and there are no appreciable differences in their uses. What is at first astonishing is that though the title is so widespread in the Gospels on the lips of Jesus, it never became a name by which Jesus was known by the early Christians. In fact, only in Acts 7:56 does the title appear, in this case used by Stephen. It is clear, therefore, that it had a special meaning for Jesus that it did not have for others. There is no doubt that he was referring to himself and not to someone else, as a careful study of all the Son of Man sayings shows. Those who think that Jesus was referring to someone else arrive at this conclusion only after first dispensing with some of the sayings. The most probable reason why he used the title Son of Man was because he wanted to avoid a term like Messiah, which carried with it too many political overtones. But what did Son of Man mean to Jesus? It is rich with the idea of humanness, possibly allusions to Daniel’s “son of man,” and perhaps a touch of the Suffering Servant idea from Isaiah 53. It is most likely that Jesus saw it in terms of his mission in a way that his hearers could not fully appreciate. It is also probable that the early church preferred Messiah because this title carried the meaning of a royal deliverer; also, after the death of Jesus, there would be no further fear of political misunderstanding.<\/p>\n<p>The term Messiah, or Christ, does not belong strictly to the teachings of Jesus, since he himself never used it. The most striking instance where he accepted the ascription of Messiah was in Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi. All the synoptic Gospels record the confession “You are the Christ,” while Matthew adds the significant comment by Jesus that flesh and blood had not revealed it but “my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17). He certainly accepted the confession and regarded it as revelation. One other case in the Synoptics where he does not specifically refute messiahship is his answer to the high priest’s question “Are you the Messiah?” (Mk 14:61). In John’s Gospel, Andrew tells Peter that he had found the Messiah (Jn 1:41); the woman at Samaria talks to Jesus, and he reveals that he is the Messiah (4:25-26). There was a widespread expectation among the Jews that a deliverer would come to overthrow their political enemies, the Romans. There were various ideas about his origin (a military leader or a heavenly warrior) and his methods (the Zealots believed that deliverance could come only through armed revolution). The reticence of Jesus concerning messiahship is therefore readily understandable.<\/p>\n<p>Another title of utmost importance is Son of God, although it occurs mainly in John’s Gospel. That both Mark and John regarded Jesus in this light is clear from explicit statements in their Gospels (cf. Mk 1:1; Jn 20:30-31). There are certainly passages where Messiah is linked with Son of God and where Jesus rejects neither title (cf. Mt 16:16). But in the teachings of Jesus one passage makes abundantly clear the special relationship that Jesus had with God as Son—namely, Matthew 11:27 (also Lk 10:22, a parallel passage), where Jesus implies that he is the Son of the Father.<\/p>\n<p>Many similar passages in John’s Gospel are, however, more explicit. The Son is unquestionably preexistent, because he knows he came from the Father and returns to the Father. It is not possible from the many references to sonship in John’s Gospel to come to any other conclusion than that Jesus regarded himself as divine. It is particularly important to note that it is also in this Gospel that Jesus is portrayed most clearly in his human nature with its attendant weaknesses. Nowhere in the teachings of Jesus did he explain how God could become man, but he assumed this as a fact. He taught with the authority of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheKingdomofGod\">Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>No one can read the synoptic Gospels without being impressed with the frequency with which the expression “kingdom of God” (or of heaven) occurs. It was clearly an important theme in the whole teaching of Jesus. It is less evident in John’s Gospel but is nevertheless still present. Many of the parables of Jesus are specifically called parables of the kingdom. Jesus’ concept of the kingdom provided a foundational idea to the Christian gospel.<\/p>\n<p>The main idea is the rule of God over people rather than a realm that belongs to God. In other words, the emphasis is on the active reigning of the King. This is important because it means that the kingdom is inextricably affected by relationships between the members and the King. It also means the kingdom will not be expressed in institutional terms.<\/p>\n<p>There is one problem with the kingdom teachings that must be faced: its timing. Some sayings imply that it is already present, while others suggest that it will not come until the future. Some scholars disavow the idea that present and future can be held together; therefore, they reject one and concentrate on the other. Those who maintain a present understanding of the kingdom developed the idea of a social gospel, since Christianity was defined as the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth. According to this view, there is no place for a future arrival of the kingdom. On the other hand, some have denied altogether the present aspect and concentrate on the future. In this case, it is difficult to see in what sense the kingdom teachings are relevant.<\/p>\n<p>Yet others have insisted that since both present and future aspects are found in the Gospel records, no explanation is satisfying that denies one at the expense of the other. One possible solution is to regard the present aspects as applying to this age but as not reaching their fulfillment until the future establishment of the kingdom. A similar solution, expressed differently, is to maintain that the reality is a future kingdom but that it has spilled over into the present. Jesus intentionally included both present and future aspects.<\/p>\n<p>That the kingdom was a theme of common interest is clear from Luke 17:20-21, where the Pharisees asked Jesus when it was coming. His answer, that it was among them, shows unmistakably a present idea. This is equally true of the statement that in the exorcism of evil spirits the kingdom had arrived (Mt 12:28; Lk 11:20). Moreover, Jesus mentioned that the kingdom has been forcefully advancing (Mt 11:12), by which he did not mean by revolutionary methods, although he clearly implied that something dynamic was already happening. This idea of dynamic power is one of the most characteristic features of the kingdom. Jesus spoke of binding the strong, armed man (Lk 11:21-22), which shows that in his ministry he expected to give a powerful demonstration against the forces of darkness.<\/p>\n<p>It is evident that the kingdom Jesus proclaimed was a kingdom in which God was supreme. It was inseparably linked with his redemptive mission, in which God was bringing spiritual deliverance to his people. Moreover, the kingdom teachings of Jesus cannot be regarded in isolation. It is part of the total message; no part of that message can be divorced from any other part without distorting the whole.<\/p>\n<p>The clearest teachings on the future aspect of the kingdom are to be found in some of the parables (Mt 13) and in the discourse on the Mt of Olives (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). In the latter, Jesus spoke of the future using imagery drawn from Jewish literature, like the references to clouds, to glory, and to angels in relation to the coming of the Son of Man (Mk 13:26-27). In Matthew’s account there is reference to a trumpet call, another familiar feature (Mt 24:31).<\/p>\n<p>Various features from the kingdom parables give the clearest idea of the nature of the kingdom. Membership in the kingdom is not considered to be universal, for in the parable of the sower not all the soils are productive. The same separation is seen in the parable of the tares and the parable of the dragnet. The tares are destroyed and only the wheat is harvested, while the bad fish are discarded. The members of the kingdom are those who hear and understand the word of the kingdom (Mt 13:23). It is clear, therefore, that a response is necessary if the benefits of the kingdom are to be enjoyed.<\/p>\n<p>There is an emphasis on growth in the parable of the mustard seed, where rapid development occurs from small beginnings. The parables of the treasure and the pearl are intended to underline the value of the kingdom. The universal character of the kingdom comes out sharply in the parable of the vineyard, where the kingdom is said to be taken away from the Jews and given to another “nation,” presumably an allusion to the Gentiles (Mt 21:43). This is in line with the great commission Jesus gave to his disciples to preach to all nations (28:19). A universal kingdom would certainly be entirely different from the messianic kingdom idea of Judaism, in which Israel was to be the central unit. It is not easy to appreciate how revolutionary the idea was of a worldwide kingdom with Gentiles and Jews on the same footing.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHisOwnDeath\">Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>The announcement of the kingdom must be linked with Jesus’ approach to his own death. Did Jesus see his death as an integral part of his mission? Some have maintained that he ended his life in disillusionment, but a brief survey of his teaching about his own destiny is sufficient to dispel such a theory. To the further question, “What meaning did Jesus attach to his forthcoming death?” he gave a series of passing indications that, when taken together, supply us with a basis on which to reconstruct some idea of the place of his death within the entire range of his mission.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to note that many times Jesus showed his awareness that details of his life were a fulfillment of Scripture (cf. Mt 26:24, 56; Mk 9:12; Lk 18:31; 24:25-27, 44-45). In all the instances cited, the suffering of Jesus is referred to as the subject of OT prophecy. This must mean that he had reflected on OT predictions and recognized that they could be fulfilled only through his own sufferings. In this case the Passion must be regarded as an indispensable part of Jesus’ consciousness of his own mission.<\/p>\n<p>This emphasis on fulfillment of Scripture is also seen in John’s Gospel. His statement that the Son of Man must be lifted up even as Moses lifted up the serpent (Jn 3:14) illustrates this point. Most of the passages where fulfillment of Scripture is mentioned are the comments of the Evangelist, John. But there can be no doubt that the fulfillment motive played a vital part both in Jesus’ own understanding of his mission and in the early Christians’ understanding of his death. In this connection, some hold that John puts more stress on the Incarnation as a means of salvation in that he sees it as an illumination of the mind. But this is only part of the truth, for there is more on the meaning of the death of Jesus in John’s Gospel than in the others.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels emphasize the divine necessity of the death of Jesus. In addition to the fulfillment motive, the idea of necessity is strong in the first prediction by Jesus of his approaching death. In John’s Gospel Jesus speaks of his “hour” several times in the earlier stages of his ministry as “not yet,” but in the later stages as having arrived. There is a sense of definite movement toward a climax, the hour undoubtedly being the hour of the Passion (cf. Jn 17:1). There is not room for any disillusionment here. Jesus knew that only through the hour of death could the Father be glorified. The climax was according to an orderly plan.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus evidently regarded his death as in some ways a sacrifice. The clearest indication of this is in the words of institution at the Last Supper. The cup is connected with the blood of the new covenant, which is said to be for the “remission of sins” (Mt 26:26-28). No explanation is given of the way in which the coming death, signified by the broken bread and poured-out wine, would bring about forgiveness of sins. But the immediate realization by the early church that Christ died for our sins (cf. 1 Cor 15:3) shows that the importance of what Jesus said had been clearly grasped. The new covenant idea is parallel to the old covenant, which according to Exodus 24 was sealed with sacrificial blood; there can be little doubt that Jesus had this in mind when he spoke the words about the new covenant. It was also akin to the ideas expressed in Jeremiah 31, referring to a covenant written on the heart rather than graven in stone.<\/p>\n<p>Another aspect of the death of Christ seen especially in John’s Gospel is the sense of completion that went with it. In Jesus’ prayer in John 17, as he faces the cross, he declares that he has finished the work that the Father had given him to do (Jn 17:4). This is reinforced by the cry from the cross, “It is finished,” which only John records (19:30). This sense of accomplishment gives an air of triumph to what might otherwise have been considered a disaster.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheHolySpirit\">Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>At several of the major events in the life of Jesus, the Evangelists note the activity of the Spirit (e.g., the Virgin Birth, the Baptism, the Temptation). It is to be expected, therefore, that Jesus would have instructed his disciples about the Spirit. However, there is surprisingly little in the synoptic Gospels on this theme. Most of the teachings come from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus began his preaching ministry in Nazareth, according to Luke, he read the statement in Isaiah 61:1-2 about the Spirit of God and applied it to himself. He saw his ministry as being inaugurated by the Spirit. This becomes clear in the way in which he responded to the charge that he cast out demons by means of Beelzebub, prince of the demons. He identified the reality of the coming of the kingdom by the fact that he was casting out evil spirits by the Spirit of God (Mt 12:28). He was, moreover, sensitive to the seriousness of blaspheming the Spirit, which he implies his accusers were in danger of doing. Whatever he did in his ministry he saw as an activity of the Spirit, and this was especially so in the contest with evil spirits.<\/p>\n<p>While warning his disciples that they would meet with opposition, Jesus assured them of the Spirit’s support when they were forced to appear before kings or governors (Mt 10:19-20; Mk 13:11). Indeed, he told them that the Spirit would speak through them, thus emphasizing that he expected a continuation of the Spirit’s activity in the future. Luke records one instance in which Jesus comments on what fathers will do for their children and asks whether God will not give the Holy Spirit to those who ask (Lk 11:13). The assumption is that God regards the Holy Spirit as the best gift to give his children. On yet another occasion, Jesus recognized that David was inspired by the Holy Spirit when he wrote Psalm 110 (Mk 12:36), reflecting Jesus’ belief in the Spirit’s agency in the production of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John provides a more detailed development of what Jesus taught about the Spirit. Teachings about the Spirit are usually linked to Jesus’ teachings about giving eternal life to those who believe in him and receive him. At the same time he spoke of the new birth and eternal life to Nicodemus, Jesus also spoke of the Spirit (Jn 3:3-8, 15-16). When he spoke of water of life to the Samaritan woman, he also spoke of the Spirit (4:14, 23-24). The same holds true for the discourses on the bread of life (6:48-63) and river of life (7:37-39). Throughout the Gospel, Jesus declares to various people that he can give them eternal life if they would believe in him. He promises them the water of life, the bread of life, and the light of life, but no one could really partake of these until after the Lord was resurrected. As a foretaste, as a sample, they could receive a certain measure of life via the Lord’s words, because his words were themselves spirit and life (6:63), but it was not until the Spirit would become available that the believers could actually become the recipients of the divine, eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>After the Lord’s discourse in John 6 (a discourse that was very troubling and offensive to most of his disciples), Jesus said, “It is the Spirit who gives eternal life” (6:63). When the Spirit became available, they could have life. Again, Jesus offered the water of life—even life flowing like rivers of living water—to the Jews assembled at the Feast of Tabernacles. He told them to come and drink of him. But no one could, then and there, come and drink of him. So John added a note: “This He spoke of the Spirit, . . . for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified” (7:39, <span>nasb<\/span>). Once Jesus would be glorified through resurrection, the Spirit of the glorified Jesus would be available for men to drink. In John 6, Jesus offered himself as the bread of life to be eaten by men; and in John 7, he offered himself as the water of life to refresh men. But no one could eat of him or drink of him until the Spirit of the glorified Jesus was made available, as was intimated in John 6:63 and then stated plainly in John 7:39.<\/p>\n<p>In John 14:16-18, Jesus went one step further in identifying himself with the Spirit. He told the disciples that he would give them another Comforter. Then he told them that they should know who this Comforter was because he was, then and there, abiding with them and would, in the near future, be in them. Who else but Jesus was abiding with them at that time? Then after telling the disciples that the Comforter would come to them, he said, “I am coming to you.” First he said that the Comforter would come to them and abide in them, and then in the same breath he said that he would come to them and abide in them (see 14:20). In short, the coming of the Comforter to the disciples was one and the same as the coming of Jesus to the disciples. The Comforter who was dwelling with the disciples that night was the Spirit in Christ; the Comforter who would be in the disciples (after the resurrection) would be Christ in the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>On the evening of the resurrection, the Lord Jesus appeared to the disciples and then breathed into them the Holy Spirit. This inbreathing, reminiscent of God’s breathing into Adam the breath of life (Gn 2:7), became the fulfillment of all that had been promised and anticipated earlier in John’s Gospel. Through this impartation, the disciples were regenerated and indwelt by the Spirit of Jesus Christ. This historical event marked the genesis of the new creation. Jesus could now be realized as the bread of life, the water of life, and the light of life. The believers now possessed his divine, eternal, risen life. From that time forward, Christ as Spirit indwelt his believers. Thus, in his first epistle John could say, “We know he lives in us because the Holy Spirit lives in us” (1 Jn 3:24).<\/p>\n<p>The indwelling Spirit helped the disciples remember Jesus’ words and actions (Jn 14:26) so that they could teach and write about them with acumen. This means that Jesus did not intend that the preservation of his teachings should be left to chance. All too often theories attempting to explain the way in which the traditions about Jesus and his teachings were transmitted in the period before there were any written Gospels are suggested without any reference to the Holy Spirit. It is not acceptable to concentrate on so-called laws of oral tradition and pay no attention to the unique factor in this case—the Holy Spirit. It is part of the Spirit’s mission to preserve and transmit the teaching of Jesus. What Jesus says in this passage about the Spirit has far-reaching significance for the formation of the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p>Another important function is the activity of the Spirit in the world. Jesus made it clear that the Spirit would convict of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment (Jn 16:8). Without the activity of the Spirit, there would be no possibility of the disciples making any impact on the world. Nevertheless, Jesus warned that the world could not receive the Spirit because it did not know him (14:17). The mystery of the Spirit is that he dwells in every believer. This indwelling aspect is of great importance and was particularly developed in the writings of Paul.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHumanity\">Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught about God’s providential care over all human beings. A person’s hairs are all numbered (Mt 10:30), which is a vivid way of saying that God is concerned about the details of human life. But God is far more concerned with the eternal soul. Jesus made it clear that it would be unprofitable for anyone to gain the world and to lose his or her soul (Mt 16:26; Mk 8:36; Lk 9:25). The focus falls on what a person is and not what he or she has. Jesus even said that a maimed body was preferable to a forfeited life (Mk 9:43-47). One’s total fulfillment depends more on one’s spiritual condition than on one’s environment or physical well-being. He was not, of course, unconcerned about people’s physical state, as his many healings show, but his major concern was with people’s relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus never viewed humans as isolated individuals. Within God’s community people were expected to have responsibility toward one another. The Sermon on the Mount illustrated this social emphasis in the teaching of Jesus. Those who are merciful to others will obtain mercy (Mt 5:7). There is special commendation for peacemakers (v 9). The disciples of Jesus are expected to bring light to others (v 16). They are expected to give more than expected (v 40). Jesus is clearly saying that people have responsibility beyond themselves.<\/p>\n<p>The relation of people to God is one of dependence. Jesus taught men and women to pray to God for daily bread (Mt 6:11) as a reminder that they cannot be wholly self-sufficient. He allowed no place in his teaching for humans to boast in their own achievements.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had some specific things to say about home life. He accepted the sanctity of the marriage contract (Mt 5:31-32; cf. 19:3-9) and therefore showed a high regard for the honor and rights of the wife. It was more in his actions and attitudes rather than his specific teachings that Jesus showed his regard for the status of women. When he spoke of men, he often used the term in the sense of people, including both men and women. There is no suggestion that in matters of faith women were in the least inferior to men. Moreover, Luke points out how many women supported Jesus and his disciples in their travels.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had a high view of the human potential but also acknowledged their present condition. The stress on repentance (Mt 4:17) shows a sinfulness of which people need to repent. This sense of need is implicit in the instances where Jesus pronounces forgiveness (e.g., to the paralytic, Mt 9:1-8; and to the woman who anointed him, Lk 7:47-48). In the Lord’s Prayer, Jesus instructs his disciples to pray for forgiveness (Mt 6:12; Lk 11:4). He takes for granted that they need it and desire to obtain it.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gives no support to any self-righteousness in men or women. This is the burden of his criticism of the religious leaders in various sayings, but particularly in Matthew 23. He was critical of Jewish teachers because they placed so much importance on works of merit as contributing to salvation. His whole approach depended on humans casting themselves on the mercy of God. This is vividly illustrated in the parable about the Pharisee and the tax collector at prayer (Lk 18:10-14). It was the latter who threw himself on the mercy of God and who was commended by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Undoubtedly, Jesus regarded sin as universal. He never suggested that there was anyone who was exempt from it. The major concept of sin in his teachings was alienation from God. This comes out clearly in John’s Gospel, with its strong antithesis between light and darkness, life and death (cf. Jn 5:24). Indeed, the “world” in John’s Gospel represents the system that takes no account of God. But sin is also seen as enslavement to Satan. The life and teachings of Jesus are seen against the background of spiritual conflict. Jesus can even say to his opponents, “You are of your father the devil” (Jn 8:44). He assumes throughout that there are hostile forces bringing man into subjection.<\/p>\n<p>In the parable of the prodigal son, sin against God is linked with sin before the father. In other words, it is regarded in terms of rebellion and revolt (Lk 15:21). This is a different assessment of the son’s offense than the one arrived at by the elder brother, who could see it only in terms of property. The view that humans are essentially in a state of rebellion against God is a basic tenet of Paul’s theological position, and it is important to note that it finds its root in the teachings of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>There is no question that Jesus had much to say about condemnation. Those who did not believe and were therefore outside the provision of salvation that Jesus had made are declared to be already condemned (Jn 3:18). At various times Jesus mentioned judgment to come, which shows that a person’s destiny is related to his or her present spiritual condition. Against this background of humanity’s spiritual need, the whole mission of Jesus must be seen. A person, if left to himself or herself, would be totally unable to achieve salvation, but Jesus came to offer eternal life to those who believe in him (Jn 3:16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheChurch\">Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>Some have supposed that Jesus did not predict that there would be a church. But on two occasions he used the word “church,” which means a people called out by God. On one of the occasions—at Caesarea Philippi—Jesus told Peter that he would build his church upon the rock (Mt 16:16-19). It seems most probable that “rock” was intended to link the foundation of the church to Peter’s particular confession about Jesus. It is certain that the later church was a community that affirmed that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God. It is important to note that it is Christ himself who is the builder of the church. He assured his disciples that it would be impregnable (the gates of hades would not overcome it). Moreover, one of the functions of the church was to proclaim forgiveness of sins, and this is implied in what Jesus said to Peter. That the words were not intended to refer exclusively to him is clear from Matthew 18:18, where similar words were addressed to all the disciples. The church, according to Matthew 18:17, was to be a community that could settle disputes between believers.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to these specific references to the church, Jesus assumed that his followers would meet together in his name (Mt 18:19-20). In his final words in Matthew’s account, he commissioned them to teach what he had taught them and to baptize new disciples (Mt 28:19-20). He promised his presence would be with them. The command to baptize was reinforced by Jesus’ own example in submitting to John’s baptism. One other special rite that Jesus expected his disciples to observe was the Lord’s Supper. His instructions about this presuppose a later community that could observe it. Since the form of words used in the institution point to the meaning of the death of Christ, it is clear that Jesus intended the future community to be frequently reminded of the center of the faith. The Christian church was to be a group of people who knew that through Christ they had entered into a new relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Although there are no references to the church in John’s Gospel, there are certainly hints that support the community idea. Jesus introduced himself as the Shepherd and spoke of his followers as forming a flock (Jn 10:16). The sheep imagery occurs again in this Gospel when Peter is instructed three times by the risen Lord to feed the sheep (Jn 21:15-17). Another figure of speech that Jesus used to bring out the group idea is that of the many branches that draw their life from the vine, and therefore belong to each other because of their common life in the vine.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus recognized that the future community would need the aid of the Spirit. His teachings on this subject laid the foundation for the evident dependence of the early church on the Spirit, as seen in the book of Acts. Finally, it should be noted that there is a close connection between the church and the kingdom, although they are not identical. The kingdom is more comprehensive than the church, which is included within it.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheFuture\">Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>Jesus thought of the kingdom in terms of both present realization and future hope. The future aspect is related to the end of the age. Although he did not spell it out in specific terms, Jesus did not leave his disciples without any knowledge of how the present age would end. He gave firm assurance that he would return at some time in the future.<\/p>\n<p>He told the disciples that the Son of Man would come with his angels in his Father’s glory (Mt 16:27). In the discourse in which he answers the disciples’ question about the end of the world, he speaks again of the Son of Man coming in clouds with power and glory (Mk 13:26), probably drawn from the familiar language of Daniel 7. Jesus described various signs that would precede his own coming. He spoke of wars, conflicts, earthquakes, famines, and disturbances in the heavens. The gospel was to be preached to all nations. At the same time many false Christs would arise.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gave such details about his return to encourage his disciples in the face of persecution. The future hope had a definitely practical purpose. The disciples were urged to watch. The coming would happen as unexpectedly as a thief in the night. Jesus said that even he himself did not know when the coming would take place (Mk 13:32).<\/p>\n<p>Another important theme affecting the future is emphasized in Jesus’ teachings about resurrection. The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the body. They attempted to trap Jesus with a question about a woman who had been married seven times. They wanted to know whose husband she would be at the resurrection (Mk 12:18-27). Jesus pointed out that there would be no marriage when the dead rise. The Sadducees’ idea about resurrection was clearly wrong. Jesus’ teaching was that the resurrected would be like the angels. There is no doubt about the resurrection of the dead, although no information is given about the resurrection body. Jesus told a story about a rich man and a poor man who both died (Lk 16:19-31). In the afterlife the rich man cries out in torment, while the poor man enjoys a state of blessedness. What is most clear from this is the certainty of the afterlife and the fact of a distinction between the two men, although we are not told on what grounds the distinction is made. Elsewhere in his teachings, Jesus suggested that the most vital requirement is faith in himself. The conversation between Jesus and the dying thief on the cross suggests that paradise for the latter consisted in an awareness of the presence of Jesus (Lk 23:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>The theme of rewards and punishment occurs in many passages. In Matthew 16:27 Jesus says that the Son of Man will reward everyone according to what he or she has done. Those who are worthless are promised punishment in darkness (Mt 25:30). Moreover, Jesus spoke of a day of judgment on which men and women must give an account, even of all their careless words (12:36-37). In the parable of the sheep and the goats, he spoke of a separation that the Son of Man will make when he comes. Those commended are those who have shown concern for the believers (25:31-46).<\/p>\n<p>Among Jesus’ most solemn statements are those that speak of hell. There is no way of getting around his teachings about eternal punishment for the unrighteous (as in Mt 25:41, 46), which is opposite to the eternal life promised to the righteous. He taught that his disciples would have a place prepared for them in heaven (Jn 14:2), and spoke of a Book of Life in which the names of his disciples were written (Lk 10:20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutMoralIssues\">Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p>Much of the teaching of Jesus is concerned with moral issues—so much so that some scholars have concluded that this was the main burden of his teaching. But the moral teachings cannot be considered apart from the many facets of his teachings outlined above. It has been said that there are close parallels between the teachings of Jesus and the moral teachings of Judaism. What is distinctive about Jesus’ teachings about morality is that the motive and power behind moral conduct is not conceived in terms of laws that must be obeyed. Right conduct is seen to be the result of a right relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was himself the pattern for moral behavior. He made clear that his aim was to fulfill the will of God. There is no sense of legalism in his approach to ethical decisions. When—in the Sermon on the Mount—he compared his own teaching with that of Moses, he showed the importance of penetrating to the inner meaning (cf. Mt 5:21-22, 27-28, 31-32). On the face of it, Jesus made more rigorous demands than the Mosaic law, because he was concerned with probing the motives as well as the actions. Many have dismissed the teaching of the Sermon on the Mount as entirely impractical, but Jesus never intended that his teaching would be easy; he set as a target nothing less than the perfection of God himself (Mt 5:48). Nevertheless, he called his yoke easy and his burden light (11:29-30), which suggests that he was not setting out an impossible ethical pattern. It must be remembered that he was not producing a manifesto for society. His concern was that each individual should have powerful motives for right decisions on matters of conduct. His reaction against a rigid application of Sabbath observance at the expense of the welfare of a needy person illustrates this point. Concern for others was rated higher than ritual correctness.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>No account of the life and teachings of Jesus would be complete without some indication of the place that Jesus Christ gained in the developing church. Such a quest naturally takes us outside the scope of the Gospels into the testimony of the book of Acts and Paul’s letters. There we can see whether the predictions of Jesus were fulfilled and whether in fact the early Christians took his teaching seriously. Although there can be no question that Jesus Christ became central to the faith of the early Christians, he was regarded from many points of view. He was seen as Messiah in the sense of a spiritual deliverer, as Lord in the sense of being sovereign over his people, as Servant in the sense of his obedience to suffering, as Son in his relation to his Father. In many ways the full understanding of what and who he was could not have occurred until after the resurrection. Therefore, we find that many facets of his teachings about himself were more fully developed in the reflections of his people. This is true in a special sense of the writings of the apostle Paul.<\/p>\n<p>Many have found a problem in linking the Gospels with their detailed presentation of the acts and teachings of Jesus with the Christ who is so central in Paul’s beliefs. The problem arises because the apostle does not refer to any specific incident in the life of Jesus and does not reflect in his epistles any acquaintance with the large amount of teaching material in the Gospels. Does this suggest that Paul had no interest in the historical Jesus? Or could it be maintained that he knew nothing about him? Those who have driven a wedge between Paul and Jesus have not given sufficient weight to those incidental indications that Paul knew a great deal more about the historical Jesus than he states in his letters. He writes, for instance, about the meekness and gentleness of Christ (2 Cor 10:1), suggesting that he knew that Jesus had said of himself that he was meek and lowly of heart (Mt 11:29). Moreover, Paul speaks of the poverty of Christ (2 Cor 8:9) and must have known that the Son of Man had nowhere to lay his head. He certainly knows the details of how Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:23-26), and he knows of his death by crucifixion. It seems reasonable to conclude that Paul assumes that his readers will be acquainted with the Gospel material.<\/p>\n<p>It is perhaps useful in this connection to inquire whether the life and teachings of Jesus played a significant part in the early Christian proclamation. One passage that is valuable in this respect is Acts 10:36-38. In Peter’s address to Cornelius, he spoke of God’s having anointed Jesus of Nazareth, and of Jesus’ having gone about doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil. It is clear that some account of the acts of Jesus was included in the early preaching, and there is no reason to suppose that this was not a regular procedure.<\/p>\n<p>There is no doubt that the example of Jesus was a powerful motive for promoting right behavior. Peter appeals to it in encouraging Christians who were suffering for their faith (1 Pt 2:21). Paul also knows the value of imitation (1 Cor 11:1; 1 Thes 1:6). Since Jesus was recognized as being a man who did not sin (cf. 2 Cor 5:21), his behavior patterns would have proved invaluable for those who needed a new standard for moral action. While this idea of example is unquestionably present in the Epistles, it would be quite wrong to suppose that it formed a major part of Christian doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>There are a few references to the teachings of Jesus in the non-Gospel portion of the NT. In the Letter of James, which is almost wholly practical, there are more allusions to the teachings of Jesus than anywhere else in the NT. This is especially true in echoes of the Sermon on the Mount, and it shows the strong contribution that the moral teaching of Jesus had on the ethical values of the early Christians. Most of the expositions of doctrine in the Epistles find their basis in some aspect of the teachings of Jesus. These teachings have an ongoing significance for the development of the church.<\/p>\n<p>To what extent is knowledge of the life and teachings of Jesus relevant to the 21st century? Existential theologians have driven such a wedge between the Christ of faith and the Jesus of history that the latter has ceased to have any importance for them. Christians today, no less than their first-century predecessors, need to know that the object of their faith is the same one who lived and taught in Galilee and Judea.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ascension of Christ; Christ; Christology; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Incarnation; Jesus Christ; Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven; Messiah; Parable; Savior; Son of God; Son of Man; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of<\/h3>\n<p>Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? What did he mean when he spoke about the kingdom? What light does his teaching throw on the meaning of his death? What did he say about the Holy Spirit? How did he describe human beings and their needs? Did he anticipate the Christian church? Did he teach anything about the end of the world? What were the main features of his moral teaching? The following sections will seek to answer these important questions.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutGod\">Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>Anyone who comes to the teachings of Jesus after reading the OT will at once recognize that much of his teaching about God is the same. Since Jesus, as all orthodox Jews of his day, accepted the testimony of the OT as inspired, it is not surprising that his approach to God was similar. This is especially true of his assumption that God was Creator. He taught a special providential care over the created order and affirmed that God watched over such small creatures as the sparrow (Mt 10:29). There is no support in the teachings of Jesus for the view that God is uninterested in the world he made.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic titles Jesus used for God was Father. This was not new, for the idea occurs in the OT, where God is seen as Father of his people Israel. This kind of fatherhood was national rather than personal. In the intertestamental period the Jews came to regard God as so holy that he was removed from direct contact with human affairs. There had to be mediators between God and people. This exalted notion of God was not conducive to the idea of God as Father, and it is against this background that the uniqueness of the personal fatherhood of God in the teaching of Jesus must be seen. There is some evidence in Judaism that prayer to God as “Our Father” was known, but what distinguishes Jesus’ teachings from that of his contemporaries is that the fatherhood of God was central to what he taught.<\/p>\n<p>The father-son relationship is particularly vivid in John’s Gospel, where Jesus as Son is seen to be in close communion with God as Father. This comes out strongly in Jesus’ prayer in John 17 and in the frequent assertions that the Father had sent the Son and that the Son was doing the will of the Father. It is this strong relationship between God and Jesus in terms of fatherhood and sonship that led Jesus to teach men to approach God in the same way. The Lord’s Prayer at once recognizes this in its opening words. It is particularly important to note that “Our Father” precedes “hallowed be thy name,” for the more intimate idea prepares the way for the more remote. Jesus never taught men to approach God with terror.<\/p>\n<p>Although there is a connection between the way in which Jesus addressed God as Father and the way in which he taught his disciples to approach God, there is also a distinction. Jesus spoke of “my Father and your Father” when he appeared to Mary Magdalene after his resurrection (Jn 20:17), but he did not say “our Father.” His sonship was unique, for he claimed that he and the Father were one (Jn 10:30).<\/p>\n<p>In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus assured his followers that their heavenly Father knows about their needs (Mt 6:32; Lk 12:30), on the strength of which they are exhorted not to be anxious. This gives some insight into the way in which Jesus’ teachings about God has a bearing on practical issues.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHimself\">Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>What Jesus said about himself is of great importance, for this undoubtedly formed the basis of what the early church came to teach about him.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used certain titles of himself or accepted them as descriptions of himself when they were used by others. The most widely used is Son of Man. This title was used by Jesus to refer to himself but was not used by anyone else. It was used, moreover, in several different kinds of sayings. Sometimes the sayings related directly to the public ministry of Jesus, like the saying that the Son of Man was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28), or that the Son of Man had authority to forgive sins (v 10). Sometimes the sayings had a direct bearing on the Passion, as when Jesus said that the Son of Man must suffer many things (Mk 8:31; note that Mt 16:21 has “he” instead of “Son of Man”). At other times the reference is to a future appearance, as when Jesus declared to the high priest that he would see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven (Mk 14:62). What did Jesus mean by the title, and why did he use it?<\/p>\n<p>The title “Son of Man” had been used before. The phrase occurs in Psalm 8:4, where it refers to man or humans. Again, the expression is used many times in Ezekiel as a mode of address to the prophet, but here also it means man. A rather different use occurs in Daniel 7:13, where one like a son of man comes with the clouds before the Ancient of Days. There is a strong similarity between this passage and the words of Jesus in Mark 14:62. But an important difference is that whereas Son of Man becomes a title in Mark, it is not so in Daniel. There is some evidence for the title in Jewish apocalyptic literature (e.g., in the Similitudes of Enoch), where it represents a preexistent being who will come to judge and overthrow the enemies of God. It seems evident from this that Jesus’ use of Son of Man as a title is unique.<\/p>\n<p>The Son of Man sayings are distributed throughout the four Gospels, and there are no appreciable differences in their uses. What is at first astonishing is that though the title is so widespread in the Gospels on the lips of Jesus, it never became a name by which Jesus was known by the early Christians. In fact, only in Acts 7:56 does the title appear, in this case used by Stephen. It is clear, therefore, that it had a special meaning for Jesus that it did not have for others. There is no doubt that he was referring to himself and not to someone else, as a careful study of all the Son of Man sayings shows. Those who think that Jesus was referring to someone else arrive at this conclusion only after first dispensing with some of the sayings. The most probable reason why he used the title Son of Man was because he wanted to avoid a term like Messiah, which carried with it too many political overtones. But what did Son of Man mean to Jesus? It is rich with the idea of humanness, possibly allusions to Daniel’s “son of man,” and perhaps a touch of the Suffering Servant idea from Isaiah 53. It is most likely that Jesus saw it in terms of his mission in a way that his hearers could not fully appreciate. It is also probable that the early church preferred Messiah because this title carried the meaning of a royal deliverer; also, after the death of Jesus, there would be no further fear of political misunderstanding.<\/p>\n<p>The term Messiah, or Christ, does not belong strictly to the teachings of Jesus, since he himself never used it. The most striking instance where he accepted the ascription of Messiah was in Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi. All the synoptic Gospels record the confession “You are the Christ,” while Matthew adds the significant comment by Jesus that flesh and blood had not revealed it but “my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17). He certainly accepted the confession and regarded it as revelation. One other case in the Synoptics where he does not specifically refute messiahship is his answer to the high priest’s question “Are you the Messiah?” (Mk 14:61). In John’s Gospel, Andrew tells Peter that he had found the Messiah (Jn 1:41); the woman at Samaria talks to Jesus, and he reveals that he is the Messiah (4:25-26). There was a widespread expectation among the Jews that a deliverer would come to overthrow their political enemies, the Romans. There were various ideas about his origin (a military leader or a heavenly warrior) and his methods (the Zealots believed that deliverance could come only through armed revolution). The reticence of Jesus concerning messiahship is therefore readily understandable.<\/p>\n<p>Another title of utmost importance is Son of God, although it occurs mainly in John’s Gospel. That both Mark and John regarded Jesus in this light is clear from explicit statements in their Gospels (cf. Mk 1:1; Jn 20:30-31). There are certainly passages where Messiah is linked with Son of God and where Jesus rejects neither title (cf. Mt 16:16). But in the teachings of Jesus one passage makes abundantly clear the special relationship that Jesus had with God as Son—namely, Matthew 11:27 (also Lk 10:22, a parallel passage), where Jesus implies that he is the Son of the Father.<\/p>\n<p>Many similar passages in John’s Gospel are, however, more explicit. The Son is unquestionably preexistent, because he knows he came from the Father and returns to the Father. It is not possible from the many references to sonship in John’s Gospel to come to any other conclusion than that Jesus regarded himself as divine. It is particularly important to note that it is also in this Gospel that Jesus is portrayed most clearly in his human nature with its attendant weaknesses. Nowhere in the teachings of Jesus did he explain how God could become man, but he assumed this as a fact. He taught with the authority of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheKingdomofGod\">Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>No one can read the synoptic Gospels without being impressed with the frequency with which the expression “kingdom of God” (or of heaven) occurs. It was clearly an important theme in the whole teaching of Jesus. It is less evident in John’s Gospel but is nevertheless still present. Many of the parables of Jesus are specifically called parables of the kingdom. Jesus’ concept of the kingdom provided a foundational idea to the Christian gospel.<\/p>\n<p>The main idea is the rule of God over people rather than a realm that belongs to God. In other words, the emphasis is on the active reigning of the King. This is important because it means that the kingdom is inextricably affected by relationships between the members and the King. It also means the kingdom will not be expressed in institutional terms.<\/p>\n<p>There is one problem with the kingdom teachings that must be faced: its timing. Some sayings imply that it is already present, while others suggest that it will not come until the future. Some scholars disavow the idea that present and future can be held together; therefore, they reject one and concentrate on the other. Those who maintain a present understanding of the kingdom developed the idea of a social gospel, since Christianity was defined as the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth. According to this view, there is no place for a future arrival of the kingdom. On the other hand, some have denied altogether the present aspect and concentrate on the future. In this case, it is difficult to see in what sense the kingdom teachings are relevant.<\/p>\n<p>Yet others have insisted that since both present and future aspects are found in the Gospel records, no explanation is satisfying that denies one at the expense of the other. One possible solution is to regard the present aspects as applying to this age but as not reaching their fulfillment until the future establishment of the kingdom. A similar solution, expressed differently, is to maintain that the reality is a future kingdom but that it has spilled over into the present. Jesus intentionally included both present and future aspects.<\/p>\n<p>That the kingdom was a theme of common interest is clear from Luke 17:20-21, where the Pharisees asked Jesus when it was coming. His answer, that it was among them, shows unmistakably a present idea. This is equally true of the statement that in the exorcism of evil spirits the kingdom had arrived (Mt 12:28; Lk 11:20). Moreover, Jesus mentioned that the kingdom has been forcefully advancing (Mt 11:12), by which he did not mean by revolutionary methods, although he clearly implied that something dynamic was already happening. This idea of dynamic power is one of the most characteristic features of the kingdom. Jesus spoke of binding the strong, armed man (Lk 11:21-22), which shows that in his ministry he expected to give a powerful demonstration against the forces of darkness.<\/p>\n<p>It is evident that the kingdom Jesus proclaimed was a kingdom in which God was supreme. It was inseparably linked with his redemptive mission, in which God was bringing spiritual deliverance to his people. Moreover, the kingdom teachings of Jesus cannot be regarded in isolation. It is part of the total message; no part of that message can be divorced from any other part without distorting the whole.<\/p>\n<p>The clearest teachings on the future aspect of the kingdom are to be found in some of the parables (Mt 13) and in the discourse on the Mt of Olives (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). In the latter, Jesus spoke of the future using imagery drawn from Jewish literature, like the references to clouds, to glory, and to angels in relation to the coming of the Son of Man (Mk 13:26-27). In Matthew’s account there is reference to a trumpet call, another familiar feature (Mt 24:31).<\/p>\n<p>Various features from the kingdom parables give the clearest idea of the nature of the kingdom. Membership in the kingdom is not considered to be universal, for in the parable of the sower not all the soils are productive. The same separation is seen in the parable of the tares and the parable of the dragnet. The tares are destroyed and only the wheat is harvested, while the bad fish are discarded. The members of the kingdom are those who hear and understand the word of the kingdom (Mt 13:23). It is clear, therefore, that a response is necessary if the benefits of the kingdom are to be enjoyed.<\/p>\n<p>There is an emphasis on growth in the parable of the mustard seed, where rapid development occurs from small beginnings. The parables of the treasure and the pearl are intended to underline the value of the kingdom. The universal character of the kingdom comes out sharply in the parable of the vineyard, where the kingdom is said to be taken away from the Jews and given to another “nation,” presumably an allusion to the Gentiles (Mt 21:43). This is in line with the great commission Jesus gave to his disciples to preach to all nations (28:19). A universal kingdom would certainly be entirely different from the messianic kingdom idea of Judaism, in which Israel was to be the central unit. It is not easy to appreciate how revolutionary the idea was of a worldwide kingdom with Gentiles and Jews on the same footing.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHisOwnDeath\">Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>The announcement of the kingdom must be linked with Jesus’ approach to his own death. Did Jesus see his death as an integral part of his mission? Some have maintained that he ended his life in disillusionment, but a brief survey of his teaching about his own destiny is sufficient to dispel such a theory. To the further question, “What meaning did Jesus attach to his forthcoming death?” he gave a series of passing indications that, when taken together, supply us with a basis on which to reconstruct some idea of the place of his death within the entire range of his mission.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to note that many times Jesus showed his awareness that details of his life were a fulfillment of Scripture (cf. Mt 26:24, 56; Mk 9:12; Lk 18:31; 24:25-27, 44-45). In all the instances cited, the suffering of Jesus is referred to as the subject of OT prophecy. This must mean that he had reflected on OT predictions and recognized that they could be fulfilled only through his own sufferings. In this case the Passion must be regarded as an indispensable part of Jesus’ consciousness of his own mission.<\/p>\n<p>This emphasis on fulfillment of Scripture is also seen in John’s Gospel. His statement that the Son of Man must be lifted up even as Moses lifted up the serpent (Jn 3:14) illustrates this point. Most of the passages where fulfillment of Scripture is mentioned are the comments of the Evangelist, John. But there can be no doubt that the fulfillment motive played a vital part both in Jesus’ own understanding of his mission and in the early Christians’ understanding of his death. In this connection, some hold that John puts more stress on the Incarnation as a means of salvation in that he sees it as an illumination of the mind. But this is only part of the truth, for there is more on the meaning of the death of Jesus in John’s Gospel than in the others.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels emphasize the divine necessity of the death of Jesus. In addition to the fulfillment motive, the idea of necessity is strong in the first prediction by Jesus of his approaching death. In John’s Gospel Jesus speaks of his “hour” several times in the earlier stages of his ministry as “not yet,” but in the later stages as having arrived. There is a sense of definite movement toward a climax, the hour undoubtedly being the hour of the Passion (cf. Jn 17:1). There is not room for any disillusionment here. Jesus knew that only through the hour of death could the Father be glorified. The climax was according to an orderly plan.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus evidently regarded his death as in some ways a sacrifice. The clearest indication of this is in the words of institution at the Last Supper. The cup is connected with the blood of the new covenant, which is said to be for the “remission of sins” (Mt 26:26-28). No explanation is given of the way in which the coming death, signified by the broken bread and poured-out wine, would bring about forgiveness of sins. But the immediate realization by the early church that Christ died for our sins (cf. 1 Cor 15:3) shows that the importance of what Jesus said had been clearly grasped. The new covenant idea is parallel to the old covenant, which according to Exodus 24 was sealed with sacrificial blood; there can be little doubt that Jesus had this in mind when he spoke the words about the new covenant. It was also akin to the ideas expressed in Jeremiah 31, referring to a covenant written on the heart rather than graven in stone.<\/p>\n<p>Another aspect of the death of Christ seen especially in John’s Gospel is the sense of completion that went with it. In Jesus’ prayer in John 17, as he faces the cross, he declares that he has finished the work that the Father had given him to do (Jn 17:4). This is reinforced by the cry from the cross, “It is finished,” which only John records (19:30). This sense of accomplishment gives an air of triumph to what might otherwise have been considered a disaster.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheHolySpirit\">Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>At several of the major events in the life of Jesus, the Evangelists note the activity of the Spirit (e.g., the Virgin Birth, the Baptism, the Temptation). It is to be expected, therefore, that Jesus would have instructed his disciples about the Spirit. However, there is surprisingly little in the synoptic Gospels on this theme. Most of the teachings come from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus began his preaching ministry in Nazareth, according to Luke, he read the statement in Isaiah 61:1-2 about the Spirit of God and applied it to himself. He saw his ministry as being inaugurated by the Spirit. This becomes clear in the way in which he responded to the charge that he cast out demons by means of Beelzebub, prince of the demons. He identified the reality of the coming of the kingdom by the fact that he was casting out evil spirits by the Spirit of God (Mt 12:28). He was, moreover, sensitive to the seriousness of blaspheming the Spirit, which he implies his accusers were in danger of doing. Whatever he did in his ministry he saw as an activity of the Spirit, and this was especially so in the contest with evil spirits.<\/p>\n<p>While warning his disciples that they would meet with opposition, Jesus assured them of the Spirit’s support when they were forced to appear before kings or governors (Mt 10:19-20; Mk 13:11). Indeed, he told them that the Spirit would speak through them, thus emphasizing that he expected a continuation of the Spirit’s activity in the future. Luke records one instance in which Jesus comments on what fathers will do for their children and asks whether God will not give the Holy Spirit to those who ask (Lk 11:13). The assumption is that God regards the Holy Spirit as the best gift to give his children. On yet another occasion, Jesus recognized that David was inspired by the Holy Spirit when he wrote Psalm 110 (Mk 12:36), reflecting Jesus’ belief in the Spirit’s agency in the production of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John provides a more detailed development of what Jesus taught about the Spirit. Teachings about the Spirit are usually linked to Jesus’ teachings about giving eternal life to those who believe in him and receive him. At the same time he spoke of the new birth and eternal life to Nicodemus, Jesus also spoke of the Spirit (Jn 3:3-8, 15-16). When he spoke of water of life to the Samaritan woman, he also spoke of the Spirit (4:14, 23-24). The same holds true for the discourses on the bread of life (6:48-63) and river of life (7:37-39). Throughout the Gospel, Jesus declares to various people that he can give them eternal life if they would believe in him. He promises them the water of life, the bread of life, and the light of life, but no one could really partake of these until after the Lord was resurrected. As a foretaste, as a sample, they could receive a certain measure of life via the Lord’s words, because his words were themselves spirit and life (6:63), but it was not until the Spirit would become available that the believers could actually become the recipients of the divine, eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>After the Lord’s discourse in John 6 (a discourse that was very troubling and offensive to most of his disciples), Jesus said, “It is the Spirit who gives eternal life” (6:63). When the Spirit became available, they could have life. Again, Jesus offered the water of life—even life flowing like rivers of living water—to the Jews assembled at the Feast of Tabernacles. He told them to come and drink of him. But no one could, then and there, come and drink of him. So John added a note: “This He spoke of the Spirit, . . . for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified” (7:39, <span>nasb<\/span>). Once Jesus would be glorified through resurrection, the Spirit of the glorified Jesus would be available for men to drink. In John 6, Jesus offered himself as the bread of life to be eaten by men; and in John 7, he offered himself as the water of life to refresh men. But no one could eat of him or drink of him until the Spirit of the glorified Jesus was made available, as was intimated in John 6:63 and then stated plainly in John 7:39.<\/p>\n<p>In John 14:16-18, Jesus went one step further in identifying himself with the Spirit. He told the disciples that he would give them another Comforter. Then he told them that they should know who this Comforter was because he was, then and there, abiding with them and would, in the near future, be in them. Who else but Jesus was abiding with them at that time? Then after telling the disciples that the Comforter would come to them, he said, “I am coming to you.” First he said that the Comforter would come to them and abide in them, and then in the same breath he said that he would come to them and abide in them (see 14:20). In short, the coming of the Comforter to the disciples was one and the same as the coming of Jesus to the disciples. The Comforter who was dwelling with the disciples that night was the Spirit in Christ; the Comforter who would be in the disciples (after the resurrection) would be Christ in the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>On the evening of the resurrection, the Lord Jesus appeared to the disciples and then breathed into them the Holy Spirit. This inbreathing, reminiscent of God’s breathing into Adam the breath of life (Gn 2:7), became the fulfillment of all that had been promised and anticipated earlier in John’s Gospel. Through this impartation, the disciples were regenerated and indwelt by the Spirit of Jesus Christ. This historical event marked the genesis of the new creation. Jesus could now be realized as the bread of life, the water of life, and the light of life. The believers now possessed his divine, eternal, risen life. From that time forward, Christ as Spirit indwelt his believers. Thus, in his first epistle John could say, “We know he lives in us because the Holy Spirit lives in us” (1 Jn 3:24).<\/p>\n<p>The indwelling Spirit helped the disciples remember Jesus’ words and actions (Jn 14:26) so that they could teach and write about them with acumen. This means that Jesus did not intend that the preservation of his teachings should be left to chance. All too often theories attempting to explain the way in which the traditions about Jesus and his teachings were transmitted in the period before there were any written Gospels are suggested without any reference to the Holy Spirit. It is not acceptable to concentrate on so-called laws of oral tradition and pay no attention to the unique factor in this case—the Holy Spirit. It is part of the Spirit’s mission to preserve and transmit the teaching of Jesus. What Jesus says in this passage about the Spirit has far-reaching significance for the formation of the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p>Another important function is the activity of the Spirit in the world. Jesus made it clear that the Spirit would convict of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment (Jn 16:8). Without the activity of the Spirit, there would be no possibility of the disciples making any impact on the world. Nevertheless, Jesus warned that the world could not receive the Spirit because it did not know him (14:17). The mystery of the Spirit is that he dwells in every believer. This indwelling aspect is of great importance and was particularly developed in the writings of Paul.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHumanity\">Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught about God’s providential care over all human beings. A person’s hairs are all numbered (Mt 10:30), which is a vivid way of saying that God is concerned about the details of human life. But God is far more concerned with the eternal soul. Jesus made it clear that it would be unprofitable for anyone to gain the world and to lose his or her soul (Mt 16:26; Mk 8:36; Lk 9:25). The focus falls on what a person is and not what he or she has. Jesus even said that a maimed body was preferable to a forfeited life (Mk 9:43-47). One’s total fulfillment depends more on one’s spiritual condition than on one’s environment or physical well-being. He was not, of course, unconcerned about people’s physical state, as his many healings show, but his major concern was with people’s relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus never viewed humans as isolated individuals. Within God’s community people were expected to have responsibility toward one another. The Sermon on the Mount illustrated this social emphasis in the teaching of Jesus. Those who are merciful to others will obtain mercy (Mt 5:7). There is special commendation for peacemakers (v 9). The disciples of Jesus are expected to bring light to others (v 16). They are expected to give more than expected (v 40). Jesus is clearly saying that people have responsibility beyond themselves.<\/p>\n<p>The relation of people to God is one of dependence. Jesus taught men and women to pray to God for daily bread (Mt 6:11) as a reminder that they cannot be wholly self-sufficient. He allowed no place in his teaching for humans to boast in their own achievements.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had some specific things to say about home life. He accepted the sanctity of the marriage contract (Mt 5:31-32; cf. 19:3-9) and therefore showed a high regard for the honor and rights of the wife. It was more in his actions and attitudes rather than his specific teachings that Jesus showed his regard for the status of women. When he spoke of men, he often used the term in the sense of people, including both men and women. There is no suggestion that in matters of faith women were in the least inferior to men. Moreover, Luke points out how many women supported Jesus and his disciples in their travels.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had a high view of the human potential but also acknowledged their present condition. The stress on repentance (Mt 4:17) shows a sinfulness of which people need to repent. This sense of need is implicit in the instances where Jesus pronounces forgiveness (e.g., to the paralytic, Mt 9:1-8; and to the woman who anointed him, Lk 7:47-48). In the Lord’s Prayer, Jesus instructs his disciples to pray for forgiveness (Mt 6:12; Lk 11:4). He takes for granted that they need it and desire to obtain it.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gives no support to any self-righteousness in men or women. This is the burden of his criticism of the religious leaders in various sayings, but particularly in Matthew 23. He was critical of Jewish teachers because they placed so much importance on works of merit as contributing to salvation. His whole approach depended on humans casting themselves on the mercy of God. This is vividly illustrated in the parable about the Pharisee and the tax collector at prayer (Lk 18:10-14). It was the latter who threw himself on the mercy of God and who was commended by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Undoubtedly, Jesus regarded sin as universal. He never suggested that there was anyone who was exempt from it. The major concept of sin in his teachings was alienation from God. This comes out clearly in John’s Gospel, with its strong antithesis between light and darkness, life and death (cf. Jn 5:24). Indeed, the “world” in John’s Gospel represents the system that takes no account of God. But sin is also seen as enslavement to Satan. The life and teachings of Jesus are seen against the background of spiritual conflict. Jesus can even say to his opponents, “You are of your father the devil” (Jn 8:44). He assumes throughout that there are hostile forces bringing man into subjection.<\/p>\n<p>In the parable of the prodigal son, sin against God is linked with sin before the father. In other words, it is regarded in terms of rebellion and revolt (Lk 15:21). This is a different assessment of the son’s offense than the one arrived at by the elder brother, who could see it only in terms of property. The view that humans are essentially in a state of rebellion against God is a basic tenet of Paul’s theological position, and it is important to note that it finds its root in the teachings of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>There is no question that Jesus had much to say about condemnation. Those who did not believe and were therefore outside the provision of salvation that Jesus had made are declared to be already condemned (Jn 3:18). At various times Jesus mentioned judgment to come, which shows that a person’s destiny is related to his or her present spiritual condition. Against this background of humanity’s spiritual need, the whole mission of Jesus must be seen. A person, if left to himself or herself, would be totally unable to achieve salvation, but Jesus came to offer eternal life to those who believe in him (Jn 3:16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheChurch\">Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>Some have supposed that Jesus did not predict that there would be a church. But on two occasions he used the word “church,” which means a people called out by God. On one of the occasions—at Caesarea Philippi—Jesus told Peter that he would build his church upon the rock (Mt 16:16-19). It seems most probable that “rock” was intended to link the foundation of the church to Peter’s particular confession about Jesus. It is certain that the later church was a community that affirmed that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God. It is important to note that it is Christ himself who is the builder of the church. He assured his disciples that it would be impregnable (the gates of hades would not overcome it). Moreover, one of the functions of the church was to proclaim forgiveness of sins, and this is implied in what Jesus said to Peter. That the words were not intended to refer exclusively to him is clear from Matthew 18:18, where similar words were addressed to all the disciples. The church, according to Matthew 18:17, was to be a community that could settle disputes between believers.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to these specific references to the church, Jesus assumed that his followers would meet together in his name (Mt 18:19-20). In his final words in Matthew’s account, he commissioned them to teach what he had taught them and to baptize new disciples (Mt 28:19-20). He promised his presence would be with them. The command to baptize was reinforced by Jesus’ own example in submitting to John’s baptism. One other special rite that Jesus expected his disciples to observe was the Lord’s Supper. His instructions about this presuppose a later community that could observe it. Since the form of words used in the institution point to the meaning of the death of Christ, it is clear that Jesus intended the future community to be frequently reminded of the center of the faith. The Christian church was to be a group of people who knew that through Christ they had entered into a new relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Although there are no references to the church in John’s Gospel, there are certainly hints that support the community idea. Jesus introduced himself as the Shepherd and spoke of his followers as forming a flock (Jn 10:16). The sheep imagery occurs again in this Gospel when Peter is instructed three times by the risen Lord to feed the sheep (Jn 21:15-17). Another figure of speech that Jesus used to bring out the group idea is that of the many branches that draw their life from the vine, and therefore belong to each other because of their common life in the vine.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus recognized that the future community would need the aid of the Spirit. His teachings on this subject laid the foundation for the evident dependence of the early church on the Spirit, as seen in the book of Acts. Finally, it should be noted that there is a close connection between the church and the kingdom, although they are not identical. The kingdom is more comprehensive than the church, which is included within it.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheFuture\">Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>Jesus thought of the kingdom in terms of both present realization and future hope. The future aspect is related to the end of the age. Although he did not spell it out in specific terms, Jesus did not leave his disciples without any knowledge of how the present age would end. He gave firm assurance that he would return at some time in the future.<\/p>\n<p>He told the disciples that the Son of Man would come with his angels in his Father’s glory (Mt 16:27). In the discourse in which he answers the disciples’ question about the end of the world, he speaks again of the Son of Man coming in clouds with power and glory (Mk 13:26), probably drawn from the familiar language of Daniel 7. Jesus described various signs that would precede his own coming. He spoke of wars, conflicts, earthquakes, famines, and disturbances in the heavens. The gospel was to be preached to all nations. At the same time many false Christs would arise.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gave such details about his return to encourage his disciples in the face of persecution. The future hope had a definitely practical purpose. The disciples were urged to watch. The coming would happen as unexpectedly as a thief in the night. Jesus said that even he himself did not know when the coming would take place (Mk 13:32).<\/p>\n<p>Another important theme affecting the future is emphasized in Jesus’ teachings about resurrection. The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the body. They attempted to trap Jesus with a question about a woman who had been married seven times. They wanted to know whose husband she would be at the resurrection (Mk 12:18-27). Jesus pointed out that there would be no marriage when the dead rise. The Sadducees’ idea about resurrection was clearly wrong. Jesus’ teaching was that the resurrected would be like the angels. There is no doubt about the resurrection of the dead, although no information is given about the resurrection body. Jesus told a story about a rich man and a poor man who both died (Lk 16:19-31). In the afterlife the rich man cries out in torment, while the poor man enjoys a state of blessedness. What is most clear from this is the certainty of the afterlife and the fact of a distinction between the two men, although we are not told on what grounds the distinction is made. Elsewhere in his teachings, Jesus suggested that the most vital requirement is faith in himself. The conversation between Jesus and the dying thief on the cross suggests that paradise for the latter consisted in an awareness of the presence of Jesus (Lk 23:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>The theme of rewards and punishment occurs in many passages. In Matthew 16:27 Jesus says that the Son of Man will reward everyone according to what he or she has done. Those who are worthless are promised punishment in darkness (Mt 25:30). Moreover, Jesus spoke of a day of judgment on which men and women must give an account, even of all their careless words (12:36-37). In the parable of the sheep and the goats, he spoke of a separation that the Son of Man will make when he comes. Those commended are those who have shown concern for the believers (25:31-46).<\/p>\n<p>Among Jesus’ most solemn statements are those that speak of hell. There is no way of getting around his teachings about eternal punishment for the unrighteous (as in Mt 25:41, 46), which is opposite to the eternal life promised to the righteous. He taught that his disciples would have a place prepared for them in heaven (Jn 14:2), and spoke of a Book of Life in which the names of his disciples were written (Lk 10:20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutMoralIssues\">Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p>Much of the teaching of Jesus is concerned with moral issues—so much so that some scholars have concluded that this was the main burden of his teaching. But the moral teachings cannot be considered apart from the many facets of his teachings outlined above. It has been said that there are close parallels between the teachings of Jesus and the moral teachings of Judaism. What is distinctive about Jesus’ teachings about morality is that the motive and power behind moral conduct is not conceived in terms of laws that must be obeyed. Right conduct is seen to be the result of a right relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was himself the pattern for moral behavior. He made clear that his aim was to fulfill the will of God. There is no sense of legalism in his approach to ethical decisions. When—in the Sermon on the Mount—he compared his own teaching with that of Moses, he showed the importance of penetrating to the inner meaning (cf. Mt 5:21-22, 27-28, 31-32). On the face of it, Jesus made more rigorous demands than the Mosaic law, because he was concerned with probing the motives as well as the actions. Many have dismissed the teaching of the Sermon on the Mount as entirely impractical, but Jesus never intended that his teaching would be easy; he set as a target nothing less than the perfection of God himself (Mt 5:48). Nevertheless, he called his yoke easy and his burden light (11:29-30), which suggests that he was not setting out an impossible ethical pattern. It must be remembered that he was not producing a manifesto for society. His concern was that each individual should have powerful motives for right decisions on matters of conduct. His reaction against a rigid application of Sabbath observance at the expense of the welfare of a needy person illustrates this point. Concern for others was rated higher than ritual correctness.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>No account of the life and teachings of Jesus would be complete without some indication of the place that Jesus Christ gained in the developing church. Such a quest naturally takes us outside the scope of the Gospels into the testimony of the book of Acts and Paul’s letters. There we can see whether the predictions of Jesus were fulfilled and whether in fact the early Christians took his teaching seriously. Although there can be no question that Jesus Christ became central to the faith of the early Christians, he was regarded from many points of view. He was seen as Messiah in the sense of a spiritual deliverer, as Lord in the sense of being sovereign over his people, as Servant in the sense of his obedience to suffering, as Son in his relation to his Father. In many ways the full understanding of what and who he was could not have occurred until after the resurrection. Therefore, we find that many facets of his teachings about himself were more fully developed in the reflections of his people. This is true in a special sense of the writings of the apostle Paul.<\/p>\n<p>Many have found a problem in linking the Gospels with their detailed presentation of the acts and teachings of Jesus with the Christ who is so central in Paul’s beliefs. The problem arises because the apostle does not refer to any specific incident in the life of Jesus and does not reflect in his epistles any acquaintance with the large amount of teaching material in the Gospels. Does this suggest that Paul had no interest in the historical Jesus? Or could it be maintained that he knew nothing about him? Those who have driven a wedge between Paul and Jesus have not given sufficient weight to those incidental indications that Paul knew a great deal more about the historical Jesus than he states in his letters. He writes, for instance, about the meekness and gentleness of Christ (2 Cor 10:1), suggesting that he knew that Jesus had said of himself that he was meek and lowly of heart (Mt 11:29). Moreover, Paul speaks of the poverty of Christ (2 Cor 8:9) and must have known that the Son of Man had nowhere to lay his head. He certainly knows the details of how Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:23-26), and he knows of his death by crucifixion. It seems reasonable to conclude that Paul assumes that his readers will be acquainted with the Gospel material.<\/p>\n<p>It is perhaps useful in this connection to inquire whether the life and teachings of Jesus played a significant part in the early Christian proclamation. One passage that is valuable in this respect is Acts 10:36-38. In Peter’s address to Cornelius, he spoke of God’s having anointed Jesus of Nazareth, and of Jesus’ having gone about doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil. It is clear that some account of the acts of Jesus was included in the early preaching, and there is no reason to suppose that this was not a regular procedure.<\/p>\n<p>There is no doubt that the example of Jesus was a powerful motive for promoting right behavior. Peter appeals to it in encouraging Christians who were suffering for their faith (1 Pt 2:21). Paul also knows the value of imitation (1 Cor 11:1; 1 Thes 1:6). Since Jesus was recognized as being a man who did not sin (cf. 2 Cor 5:21), his behavior patterns would have proved invaluable for those who needed a new standard for moral action. While this idea of example is unquestionably present in the Epistles, it would be quite wrong to suppose that it formed a major part of Christian doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>There are a few references to the teachings of Jesus in the non-Gospel portion of the NT. In the Letter of James, which is almost wholly practical, there are more allusions to the teachings of Jesus than anywhere else in the NT. This is especially true in echoes of the Sermon on the Mount, and it shows the strong contribution that the moral teaching of Jesus had on the ethical values of the early Christians. Most of the expositions of doctrine in the Epistles find their basis in some aspect of the teachings of Jesus. These teachings have an ongoing significance for the development of the church.<\/p>\n<p>To what extent is knowledge of the life and teachings of Jesus relevant to the 21st century? Existential theologians have driven such a wedge between the Christ of faith and the Jesus of history that the latter has ceased to have any importance for them. Christians today, no less than their first-century predecessors, need to know that the object of their faith is the same one who lived and taught in Galilee and Judea.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ascension of Christ; Christ; Christology; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Incarnation; Jesus Christ; Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven; Messiah; Parable; Savior; Son of God; Son of Man; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? Wh...","summary_en":"JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? Wh...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":30016,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Peter, the Apostle","title_en":"Peter, the Apostle","content_ro":"<h3>PETER, <span>The Apostle<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>One of the 12 disciples; rose to prominence both among the disciples during Jesus’ ministry and among the apostles afterwards.<\/p>\n<p>There are actually four forms of Peter’s name in the New Testament: the Hebrew translated into Greek, “Simeon” to “Simon,” and the Aramaic translated into Greek, “Cephas” to “Petros” (meaning “rock”). His given name was Simeon bar-Jonah (Mt 16:17; cf. Jn 1:42), “Simon the son of John,” which was common Semitic nomenclature. It is most likely that “Simon” was not merely the Greek equivalent of “Simeon” but that, having his home in bilingual Galilee, “Simon” was the alternate form he used in dealings with Gentiles. In fact, it was quite common for a cosmopolitan Jew to employ three forms of his name depending on the occasion: Aramaic, Latin, and Greek. The double name “Simon Peter” (or “Simon called Peter”) demonstrates that the second name was a later addition, similar to “Jesus, the Christ.” The number of times that the Aramaic equivalent “Cephas” is used (once in John, four times each in Galatians and 1 Corinthians), as well as its translation into the Greek (not common with proper names), indicates the importance of the secondary name. Both Aramaic and Greek forms mean “the rock,” an obvious indication of Peter’s stature in the early church (see below on Mt 16:18). It is obvious that he was called “Simon” throughout Jesus’ ministry but came to be known as “Peter” more and more in the apostolic age.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Background<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Conversion and Call<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Place among the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>• Peter the Rock<\/p>\n<p>• Peter the Apostle<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Future Ministry<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersBackground\">Peter’s Background<\/p>\n<p>Peter was raised in bilingual Galilee. John 1:44 says that the home of Andrew (his brother) and Peter was Bethsaida, the whereabouts of which is difficult to place archaeologically. The only site about which we know is east of the Jordan in the district called Gaulanitis. Yet John 12:21 places Bethsaida in Galilee; however, it is possible that John is reflecting the popular use of the term “Galilee” rather than the legally correct one. Peter and Andrew had a fishing business centered in Capernaum (Mk 1:21, 29) and perhaps were partners with James and John (Lk 5:10). It is also likely that they intermittently continued in their business while disciples, as indicated in the fishing scene in John 21:1-8.<\/p>\n<p>One difficulty with this is the series of statements saying, “We have left all and followed You” (Mt 19:27; Mk 10:28; Lk 18:28, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The majority of interpreters have given this an absolute sense of “sold” or “left” their business. However, Luke 18:28 occurs in the context of leaving their homes but obviously is not meant in an absolute sense. It seems most likely that the disciples did leave the practice of their fishing businesses to follow Christ, but kept the tools of their trade and returned to their trades when necessary.<\/p>\n<p>They certainly did not abandon their families, as evidenced by Peter, who returned to his home at the end of each tour. The New Testament tells us that Peter was married. In Mark 1:29-31 Jesus heals his mother-in-law, who perhaps was living with Peter. In fact, it is possible that his home became Jesus’ headquarters in Galilee. (Matthew 8:14 may indicate that Jesus dwelt there.) First Corinthians 9:5 says that Peter, along with the other married apostles, often took his wife with him on his missionary journeys. Later tradition speaks of his children (Clement of Alexandria’s <em>Stromateis<\/em> 2.6.52) and says that Peter was present at the martyrdom of his wife (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 3.30.2).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersConversionandCall\">Peter’s Conversion and Call<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s brother, Andrew, was a disciple of John the Baptist, according to John 1:35-40. This follows the witness of John in 1:29-34 and is the second stage of John’s discipleship drama in chapter one—i.e., after bearing witness he now sends his own followers to Jesus. Andrew and the unnamed disciple (perhaps Philip as in Jn 1:43 or the “beloved disciple,” whom many identify with John himself) then “follow” Jesus (a term used often in John for discipleship). The next day Andrew follows the Baptist’s example and finds his brother Simon, saying, “We have found the Messiah” (Jn 1:41, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Peter’s conversion is presupposed in John 1:42, where Simon is brought to Jesus by Andrew and there given a new name.<\/p>\n<p>There are three separate episodes in the Gospels in which Simon is called, and these overlap with three episodes in which he is given the name “Cephas” (“Peter,” which means “rock”) by Jesus. John locates the event in Judea where John the Baptist was baptizing. The synoptic Gospels have two different scenes. The first call takes place at the Sea of Galilee (Mk 1:16-20; Mt 4:18-22). Jesus is walking along the shore and sees Peter and Andrew along with James and John casting their nets into the sea. At this time he calls them to become “fishers of men.” Luke then expands this into a fishing scene (Lk 5:1-11), in which the disciples have fished all night and caught nothing but at the command of Jesus lower their nets and catch an amount of fish so great that the boat starts to sink. The episode concludes exactly like the Markan abbreviated form: Jesus says that from now on they will “catch men,” and as a result they leave everything and follow him.<\/p>\n<p>The second synoptic episode involving Peter’s call (and his new name) is the official choice of the Twelve upon the mountain (Mk 3:13-19 and parallels); in the list of the names we have “Simon he surnamed Peter.” The final occurrence dealing with Peter’s new name is found in Matthew 16:17-19, in connection with Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi.<\/p>\n<p>It is somewhat difficult to harmonize these episodes properly. Were there three different episodes in which Simon was called (Jn 1:42; Mk 1:20; 3:16) and three separate incidents in which he was given the name Cephas\/Peter (Jn 1:42; Mk 3:16; Mt 16:18)? It is attractive to a broad spectrum of academia to assume that one single event, which happened at some indeterminate time toward the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, was later expanded into these diverse traditions. However, a closer examination of the Gospel data does not necessitate such a conclusion. John 1:35-42 is not an institutional scene that connotes an official call. Rather, it describes the first encounter with Jesus and realization regarding his significance. The “renaming” is in the future tense and looks to a later event. Moreover, John deliberately omits most of the crisis events in Jesus’ life (the baptism, the choice of the Twelve, the Transfiguration, the words of institution at the Last Supper, Gethsemane) and replaces them with highly theological scenes that teach the spiritual significance of the events. This is what he has done here.<\/p>\n<p>The same is true of the first synoptic call, i.e., the fishing scene. Again, there is no hint of official ordination to office here but rather a proleptic or prophetic hint of future ministry. This is especially true of the highly theological scene in Luke, which promises abundant results. Again in all three accounts the future tense is employed: “I will make you fishers of men” (Matthew and Mark), “You will catch men” (Luke, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The call in Mark 1:20 and Matthew 4:21 and their reaction (leaving all behind and following Jesus) is the opening gambit that is finalized in the actual institutional scene in Mark 3:13-19 and parallels. The wording does not indicate that these two episodes are doublets, for the actual appointment of the disciples occurs in the second passage. We must differentiate between the original call to one segment (who became the so-called “inner circle” of the Twelve) and the final choice of all the disciples.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersPlaceamongtheTwelve\">Peter’s Place among the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>The prominence of Simon Peter in the Gospels and Acts cannot be disputed. While some have attempted to attribute this to his leadership role in the later church, there is no basis for that in the text of the NT. From the very beginning Simon attained preeminence above the others. In the lists of the Twelve just mentioned, Simon’s name always appears first, and in Matthew 10:2 it introduces his name as “the first.” Moreover, the Twelve are often designated “Peter and those with him” (Mk 1:36; Lk 9:32; 8:45, <span>nkjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Throughout the accounts Peter acted and spoke on behalf of the other disciples. At the Transfiguration it is Peter who wanted to erect tents (Mk 9:5), and he alone had sufficient faith to attempt walking on the water (Mt 14:28-31). It is Peter who asks the Lord to explain his teaching on forgiveness (Mt 18:21) and parables (Mt 15:15; Lk 12:41) and who speaks the disciples’ minds in Matthew 19:27, “Behold, we have left everything and followed you; what’s in it for us?” (paraphrased). The collectors of the temple tax come to Peter as leader of the group (Mt 17:24). As a member of the inner circle (with James and John, possibly Andrew in Mk 13:3) he was often alone with Jesus (at the raising of Jairus’s daughter, Mk 5:37 and parallels; at the Transfiguration, Mk 9:2 and parallels; at Gethsemane, Mk 14:33 and Mt 26:37). Jesus asks Peter and John to prepare the Passover meal in Luke 22:8, and in Mark 14:37 (and Mt 26:40) he directs his rebuke to Peter as representing the others (“Could ye not watch with me one hour?”). Finally, the message of the angel at the tomb as recorded in Mark 16:7 said, “Go your way, tell his disciples and Peter.” Certainly Peter held a very special place among the Twelve.<\/p>\n<p>This was especially evident in the Caesarea Philippi episode (Mk 8:27-33 and parallels). It was Peter whose confession became the high point of the Gospel accounts, “Thou art the Christ” (Luke adds “of God”; Matthew, “the Son of the living God”). After Jesus then spoke of the suffering of the Son of Man, Peter rebuked him, and in Mark’s description Jesus then turned, gazed at all the disciples, and said to Peter, “Get thee behind me, Satan: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but the things that be of men” (v 33, <span>kjv<\/span>). This was obviously directed at them all through Peter.<\/p>\n<p>The portrait of Peter that comes through all four accounts pictures him as impulsive, often rash; he is the first to act and speak his mind and was typified by his enthusiasm for everything in which he had a part. At the sight of Jesus walking on the water, Peter asked that the Lord command him to do the same and then immediately leaped out of the boat and began doing just that. At the Transfiguration, while the others were awed into silence by the appearance of Moses and Elijah, Peter the man of action said, “If thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles” (Mt 17:4, <span>kjv<\/span>). Mark and Luke both add here that Peter did not know what he was saying. Peter’s unguarded and unthinking tendency to protest Jesus’ statements is seen not only at Caesarea Philippi but also at the foot-washing scene in John 13:4-11 when he said first, “You shall never ever wash my feet”; and then after Jesus’ strong retort, “If I do not wash you, you have no part with Me,” he reversed himself completely, stating, “Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and head” (13:8-9, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Finally, in the account of the race to the tomb (Jn 20:2-10), the beloved disciple, reaching the tomb first, paused while Peter immediately and impulsively entered it. Peter was certainly one who “rushed in where angels fear to tread.” However, this very trait aligns him with all of us and may be one of the major reasons why he becomes the representative disciple throughout the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetertheRock\">Peter the Rock<\/p>\n<p>The key to the significance of Simon Peter is obviously the controversial addendum to the Caesarea Philippi episode, found only in Matthew 16:17-19, Jesus’ testimonial to Peter. There are several crucial aspects of this saying. The most important for this study is verse 18, “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church” (<span>kjv<\/span>). There have been many interpretations of this down through history: (1) It refers to Peter as the “rock” or first bishop of the church. This was the Roman Catholic interpretation from the third century on and was employed as a prooftext for apostolic succession, but it is not hinted at anywhere in the context or even in the epistles: it was not a first-century concept. (2) The majority of Protestants since the Reformation have taken this to be a reference to Peter’s statement of faith rather than to Peter himself; but this neglects the wordplay, which is even more pronounced in Aramaic, which has only one form for “Cephas” (rock). (3) An alternative has been to take “this rock” as a reference to Jesus himself, but that is fanciful and is hardly in the context. In conclusion, “this rock” is almost certainly a reference to Peter, but it must be understood in two ways. First, Peter was to become the foundation upon which Christ would build his church, a position clearly attested to in Acts. This does not mean that Peter had an authority above the other apostles. Paul’s rebuke of Peter in Galatians 2:11-14 demonstrates that he was not above them, and at the Jerusalem council in Acts 15 it is James who has the position of leadership. Second, Peter is seen here not merely as an individual but as the representative of the disciples. This view is coming to increasing prominence today. It recognized the Jewish concept of “corporate identity” in which the leader was identified with the corporate body (e.g., the king or high priest representing the nation before God). This concept is also in keeping with Matthew 18:18-20, which passes on the same authority to the church as is here given to Peter. In this view Peter as the rock becomes the first of the building blocks upon which Christ, the chief cornerstone (to continue the metaphor), will build his church (see Eph 2:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>Two other aspects are worthy of note here. First, verse 18 says, “the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” The “gates of hell” is a common Jewish euphemism for death’s inevitable and irrevocable power. Jesus is saying that Satan will not be triumphant over the church, and his sphere of operations, death, will be defeated (cf. 1 Cor 15:26, 54-55). The church would undergo persecution and martyrdom, but the church would be triumphant.<\/p>\n<p>Second, verse 19 promises, “I will give unto thee [singular] the keys of the kingdom,” another statement used of apostolic succession by the medieval church. Again, this must be understood in light of corporate identity; Peter, as the preeminent figure in the early church, here embodies the community in his leadership. The “keys of the kingdom” are in direct contrast to the “gates of hell” (cf. Rv 1:18, “the keys of hell and death” and Rv 3:7, the “key of David”), and this follows the imagery of the building seen in the rock upon which Christ will build his church. Here Peter is given the keys that will unlock the power of the kingdom in building God’s community, the church. The future tense (“will give”) undoubtedly points to the postresurrection period, when that power was unleashed and the church erected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetertheApostle\">Peter the Apostle<\/p>\n<p>Two events led to the new Peter who fills the pages of Acts: his reinstatement described in John 21:15-17 and the resurrection appearance of the Lord, which is never described but alluded to in Luke 24:34 and 1 Corinthians 15:5. His denial was certainly proof that he was not yet able to assume his predicted position as the rock of the church. Both Luke and Paul seem to state that the risen Lord appeared to Simon Peter before the others, which would be fitting in light of his preeminence in the early church. During the Palestinian era, the fifteen-year period prior to the Gentile mission, Peter was the leading figure. The others mentioned in Acts 1–12 are all secondary to Peter, the dominant director of church policy. These include John, who is with Peter in the temple (3:1), the prison (4:13), and Samaria (8:14); Stephen, who was one of the Seven and whose revolutionary preaching led to his martyrdom (chs 6–7); Philip, another of the Seven who proclaimed the gospel in Samaria and to the Ethiopian eunuch (ch 8); Barnabas, who set an example of communal sharing (4:36-37) and was an official delegate to Antioch (11:20-30); Paul, a miraculous convert and witness (9:1-30; 11:25-30; 12:25); and James, who became the first apostolic martyr (12:2). It is Peter who proposes the choice of the 12th disciple (1:15-17), who proclaims the gospel at Pentecost (2:14-40), who utters the healing word (3:6), and who defends the gospel before the Sanhedrin (4:8-12, 19-20; 5:29-32). The episode regarding Ananias and Sapphira is particularly poignant, for here Peter functions as the avenging messenger of God; nowhere is his authority more evident. We would also note his authority in the scene at Samaria concerning the attempt of Simon the Sorcerer to buy the charismatic power (8:18-24). Again, it is Peter whose influence commands the situation. In these two incidents we certainly see the “binding and loosing” jurisdiction (cf. Mt 16:19) exhibited in Peter.<\/p>\n<p>Yet Peter and the church still came under the strictures of their Jewish heritage. The evidence points to a Jewish proselyte self-consciousness on the part of the early church. They viewed themselves as the righteous remnant, living in the age of Messianic fulfillment, but still interpreted themselves in a Jewish sense and conducted their evangelism in the proselyte form of Jewish particularism (i.e., Gentiles could only be converted through Judaism). Two events altered this. First, the Hellenistic Jewish branch of the church rebelled against the Hebrew Christians, which resulted in the appointment of the seven deacons and a change in the orthodox policy of the Palestinian church. Second, this then led to a new preaching ministry, first by Stephen, whose insights ended in his martyrdom and the dispersal of the Hellenistic branch in chapter 8; then by Philip and others, who extended the gospel even further, to the Samaritans and God-fearers. As a further result, Peter and John came to Samaria (8:14), the next significant step toward the Gentile mission. Thus ended the centrality of Jerusalem in the unfolding story.<\/p>\n<p>The two miracles of Peter, at Lydda (the paralytic) and Joppa (raising the dead woman) in Acts 9:32-42, are probably intended to parallel similar miracles of Jesus in Luke’s first work (Lk 5:18-26; 8:49-56). This is part of a major theme in Acts whereby Jesus’ life and ministry are paralleled and continued in the work of the Spirit through the church. Again Peter is seen in a representative role.<\/p>\n<p>The new relationships are extended in two further scenes. First, Peter stays with “Simon, a tanner,” in Joppa, an unclean trade; no pious Jew would knowingly have social contact with such a one. Even more important, God teaches Peter through a dream (10:10-16) that the old dichotomy between clean and unclean has been broken. This then leads Peter to the home of an uncircumcised Gentile, the most serious social taboo for the Jew, and subsequent events force Peter to admit Gentiles into the church without the necessity of Jewish proselyte requirements. The serious consequences of this are seen in the debate that ensued in Jerusalem (Acts 11:2-3) and later at the council (Acts 15:1-21). The centrality of this event is demonstrated in the extent to which Luke reproduces Peter’s speech, which seems to be a repetition of chapter 10 but is meant to highlight this crucial episode. Often forgotten in the significance of this for the early church is the fact that for Luke the Gentile mission begins with Peter, not Paul. He is the one upon whom the salvific act of God descends; and as the leader of the church, he was the first important witness to it.<\/p>\n<p>The persecution of Herod Agrippa (Acts 12:1-4) was likely due to the furor caused by this free intercourse with Gentiles; and it ended the period of Peter’s leadership in Jerusalem. The Jewish people were greatly offended by the new Christian push; and according to Luke in Acts, the idyllic period of popularity, in which the common people supported the church, effectively ceased at this time. Peter’s miraculous release and the dramatic scene at Mary’s house typified the special place of Peter, but the momentum shifts. Peter is forced to flee Jerusalem, and in the interim James arises to leadership (Acts 12:17); at the Jerusalem council it is the latter who has the chair and presents the council’s decision (Acts 15:6-29).<\/p>\n<p>The exact relationship between Peter and the other disciples, especially with the so-called pillars—James and John—and the apostle Paul, cannot be ascertained. The evidence is too vague. Many have thought that indeed there were no truly universal leaders, for the early church was too diverse. However, that is unlikely, and Luke’s portrayal in Acts parallels Paul’s statement in Galatians 2:8 that Peter was the apostle par excellence to the “circumcised” and Paul to the “Gentiles.” They were the universal leaders, while James became the local leader of the Jerusalem eldership. However, neither Peter nor Paul had dominical status similar to that of later popes (i.e., neither was the absolute spokesman of the church and above criticism). So-called emissaries from James could have such an influence on Peter that he would hypocritically change his behavior before Gentiles (Gal 2:12), and Paul could rebuke Peter publicly for doing so (Gal 2:11-14). Paul never claimed authority over the other disciples and even sought their approval and “the right hands of fellowship” for his ministry to the Gentiles (Gal 2:1-10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersFutureMinistry\">Peter’s Future Ministry<\/p>\n<p>We have very little hard evidence for Peter’s other movements. It seems as though Peter gradually turned from leadership to missionary work. However, this is an oversimplification. It is most likely that, following the similar pattern of Paul, he combined the two. The presence of a “Cephas party” at Corinth (1 Cor 1:12; 3:22) may indicate that Peter had spent some time there. This is made even more likely when Paul uses Peter as the main example for taking one’s wife on missionary expeditions (1 Cor 9:5). The “Cephas party” probably consisted of those who were converted under his ministry; it is probable that they were Jewish Christians and opposed the “Paul party” on Jewish-Gentile debates reflected elsewhere in 1 Corinthians.<\/p>\n<p>The First Epistle of Peter was sent to churches in northern Asia Minor—the provinces of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia. The problem here is that there is no hint that Peter had been there and no personal notations in the epistle to demonstrate his acquaintance with these churches. However, it does show that he was very interested in them. In fact, some believe that the reason why Paul was not allowed into this district according to Acts 16:7-8 was that Peter was already ministering there. In short, the question of Peter’s involvement in Asia Minor must remain an open one.<\/p>\n<p>There is no final NT evidence that Peter went to Rome. First Peter 5:13 says that the epistle was sent from “Babylon,” and it is doubtful that this was the literal Babylon, because there is no tradition that Peter ever went there, and Babylon was sparsely populated back then. It is probably a cryptic symbol for Rome, the “Babylon of the West.” It is most likely that the “Babylon” of Revelation 14:8 and 16:19 is also a symbol of Rome. This would fit the strong tradition in the early church that indeed Peter did minister there.<\/p>\n<p>There are four early external witnesses concerning Peter’s death. John 21:18 mentions only the martyrdom of Peter but does not give any hint as to the place. First Clement was written at the end of the first century and reports the martyrdom of Peter and Paul among others. While 1 Clement 5:4 testifies only to the fact and not the place of Peter’s martyrdom, a study of two aspects favors Rome—the reference to a “great multitude” of martyrdoms, which best fits the Neronian persecution, and the phrase “glorious example among us,” which shows that the people of Clement’s own church (Rome) were involved. Ignatius’s letter to the Romans (4:3) also testifies generally to the martyrdom of Peter and Paul, and again the context favors Rome as the place. He says, “I did not command you as did Peter and Paul,” which shows that they had ministries in Rome. The Ascension of Isaiah 4:2-3, a Jewish Christian work of the same period, speaks of Beliar (probably Nero) who martyrs “one of the Twelve,” almost certainly Peter. Therefore the earliest evidence does not explicitly point to Rome as the place of Peter’s death, but that is the most likely hypothesis.<\/p>\n<p>Definite statements to that effect appear toward the end of the second century. Dionysius, bishop of Corinth, in a letter dated c. 170 (preserved in Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 2.25.8) says that Peter and Paul taught together in Italy. At the end of that century Irenaeus says (in <em>Against Heresies<\/em> 2.1-3) that Peter and Paul preached in Rome, and Tertullian in the same general period adds that Peter was martyred “like . . . the Lord” (<em>Scorpiace<\/em> 15). Clement of Alexandria and Origen both allude to Peter’s presence in Rome, and the latter adds the belief that he was “crucified head-downwards” (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 2.15.2; 3.1.2). The tradition that Peter was crucified may be supported in John 21:18: “when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall . . . carry thee wither thou wouldest not” (<span>kjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The fact that Paul’s Epistle to the Romans (c. 55–57) does not mention Peter tells us that he could not have gone there earlier than that. If 1 Peter was written during the Neronian persecution, as those who hold to Petrine authorship believe, he must have gone there sometime in the late 50s or early 60s. Of course, the extent of his ministry in Rome also cannot be known. Some indeed have posited that he had little or no extensive stay in Rome. The facts, as they can be recovered, point to certain tentative conclusions. Peter did have some type of ministry in Rome, though the extent of it cannot be known. However, it is doubtful, in light of the early testimony to his preaching ministry there, that he was merely passing through Rome when caught in Nero’s pogrom. Therefore he most likely spent the last years of his ministry in Rome and there suffered martyrdom under Nero, perhaps by crucifixion.<\/p>\n<p>Simon Peter, along with Paul, was the leading figure in the early church. His impact has been tragically dimmed by the acrimonious debates of Roman Catholic– Protestant circles, but the biblical evidence is clear. He was the leading disciple of Jesus and indeed the “rock” who provided the foundation for the church. As the representative disciple, his enthusiasm and even his weaknesses have made him the supreme example of the developing disciple, one who, through the power of the risen Lord, rose above his faults to become a towering figure on the church scene.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PETER, <span>The Apostle<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>One of the 12 disciples; rose to prominence both among the disciples during Jesus’ ministry and among the apostles afterwards.<\/p>\n<p>There are actually four forms of Peter’s name in the New Testament: the Hebrew translated into Greek, “Simeon” to “Simon,” and the Aramaic translated into Greek, “Cephas” to “Petros” (meaning “rock”). His given name was Simeon bar-Jonah (Mt 16:17; cf. Jn 1:42), “Simon the son of John,” which was common Semitic nomenclature. It is most likely that “Simon” was not merely the Greek equivalent of “Simeon” but that, having his home in bilingual Galilee, “Simon” was the alternate form he used in dealings with Gentiles. In fact, it was quite common for a cosmopolitan Jew to employ three forms of his name depending on the occasion: Aramaic, Latin, and Greek. The double name “Simon Peter” (or “Simon called Peter”) demonstrates that the second name was a later addition, similar to “Jesus, the Christ.” The number of times that the Aramaic equivalent “Cephas” is used (once in John, four times each in Galatians and 1 Corinthians), as well as its translation into the Greek (not common with proper names), indicates the importance of the secondary name. Both Aramaic and Greek forms mean “the rock,” an obvious indication of Peter’s stature in the early church (see below on Mt 16:18). It is obvious that he was called “Simon” throughout Jesus’ ministry but came to be known as “Peter” more and more in the apostolic age.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Background<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Conversion and Call<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Place among the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>• Peter the Rock<\/p>\n<p>• Peter the Apostle<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Future Ministry<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersBackground\">Peter’s Background<\/p>\n<p>Peter was raised in bilingual Galilee. John 1:44 says that the home of Andrew (his brother) and Peter was Bethsaida, the whereabouts of which is difficult to place archaeologically. The only site about which we know is east of the Jordan in the district called Gaulanitis. Yet John 12:21 places Bethsaida in Galilee; however, it is possible that John is reflecting the popular use of the term “Galilee” rather than the legally correct one. Peter and Andrew had a fishing business centered in Capernaum (Mk 1:21, 29) and perhaps were partners with James and John (Lk 5:10). It is also likely that they intermittently continued in their business while disciples, as indicated in the fishing scene in John 21:1-8.<\/p>\n<p>One difficulty with this is the series of statements saying, “We have left all and followed You” (Mt 19:27; Mk 10:28; Lk 18:28, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The majority of interpreters have given this an absolute sense of “sold” or “left” their business. However, Luke 18:28 occurs in the context of leaving their homes but obviously is not meant in an absolute sense. It seems most likely that the disciples did leave the practice of their fishing businesses to follow Christ, but kept the tools of their trade and returned to their trades when necessary.<\/p>\n<p>They certainly did not abandon their families, as evidenced by Peter, who returned to his home at the end of each tour. The New Testament tells us that Peter was married. In Mark 1:29-31 Jesus heals his mother-in-law, who perhaps was living with Peter. In fact, it is possible that his home became Jesus’ headquarters in Galilee. (Matthew 8:14 may indicate that Jesus dwelt there.) First Corinthians 9:5 says that Peter, along with the other married apostles, often took his wife with him on his missionary journeys. Later tradition speaks of his children (Clement of Alexandria’s <em>Stromateis<\/em> 2.6.52) and says that Peter was present at the martyrdom of his wife (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 3.30.2).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersConversionandCall\">Peter’s Conversion and Call<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s brother, Andrew, was a disciple of John the Baptist, according to John 1:35-40. This follows the witness of John in 1:29-34 and is the second stage of John’s discipleship drama in chapter one—i.e., after bearing witness he now sends his own followers to Jesus. Andrew and the unnamed disciple (perhaps Philip as in Jn 1:43 or the “beloved disciple,” whom many identify with John himself) then “follow” Jesus (a term used often in John for discipleship). The next day Andrew follows the Baptist’s example and finds his brother Simon, saying, “We have found the Messiah” (Jn 1:41, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Peter’s conversion is presupposed in John 1:42, where Simon is brought to Jesus by Andrew and there given a new name.<\/p>\n<p>There are three separate episodes in the Gospels in which Simon is called, and these overlap with three episodes in which he is given the name “Cephas” (“Peter,” which means “rock”) by Jesus. John locates the event in Judea where John the Baptist was baptizing. The synoptic Gospels have two different scenes. The first call takes place at the Sea of Galilee (Mk 1:16-20; Mt 4:18-22). Jesus is walking along the shore and sees Peter and Andrew along with James and John casting their nets into the sea. At this time he calls them to become “fishers of men.” Luke then expands this into a fishing scene (Lk 5:1-11), in which the disciples have fished all night and caught nothing but at the command of Jesus lower their nets and catch an amount of fish so great that the boat starts to sink. The episode concludes exactly like the Markan abbreviated form: Jesus says that from now on they will “catch men,” and as a result they leave everything and follow him.<\/p>\n<p>The second synoptic episode involving Peter’s call (and his new name) is the official choice of the Twelve upon the mountain (Mk 3:13-19 and parallels); in the list of the names we have “Simon he surnamed Peter.” The final occurrence dealing with Peter’s new name is found in Matthew 16:17-19, in connection with Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi.<\/p>\n<p>It is somewhat difficult to harmonize these episodes properly. Were there three different episodes in which Simon was called (Jn 1:42; Mk 1:20; 3:16) and three separate incidents in which he was given the name Cephas\/Peter (Jn 1:42; Mk 3:16; Mt 16:18)? It is attractive to a broad spectrum of academia to assume that one single event, which happened at some indeterminate time toward the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, was later expanded into these diverse traditions. However, a closer examination of the Gospel data does not necessitate such a conclusion. John 1:35-42 is not an institutional scene that connotes an official call. Rather, it describes the first encounter with Jesus and realization regarding his significance. The “renaming” is in the future tense and looks to a later event. Moreover, John deliberately omits most of the crisis events in Jesus’ life (the baptism, the choice of the Twelve, the Transfiguration, the words of institution at the Last Supper, Gethsemane) and replaces them with highly theological scenes that teach the spiritual significance of the events. This is what he has done here.<\/p>\n<p>The same is true of the first synoptic call, i.e., the fishing scene. Again, there is no hint of official ordination to office here but rather a proleptic or prophetic hint of future ministry. This is especially true of the highly theological scene in Luke, which promises abundant results. Again in all three accounts the future tense is employed: “I will make you fishers of men” (Matthew and Mark), “You will catch men” (Luke, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The call in Mark 1:20 and Matthew 4:21 and their reaction (leaving all behind and following Jesus) is the opening gambit that is finalized in the actual institutional scene in Mark 3:13-19 and parallels. The wording does not indicate that these two episodes are doublets, for the actual appointment of the disciples occurs in the second passage. We must differentiate between the original call to one segment (who became the so-called “inner circle” of the Twelve) and the final choice of all the disciples.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersPlaceamongtheTwelve\">Peter’s Place among the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>The prominence of Simon Peter in the Gospels and Acts cannot be disputed. While some have attempted to attribute this to his leadership role in the later church, there is no basis for that in the text of the NT. From the very beginning Simon attained preeminence above the others. In the lists of the Twelve just mentioned, Simon’s name always appears first, and in Matthew 10:2 it introduces his name as “the first.” Moreover, the Twelve are often designated “Peter and those with him” (Mk 1:36; Lk 9:32; 8:45, <span>nkjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Throughout the accounts Peter acted and spoke on behalf of the other disciples. At the Transfiguration it is Peter who wanted to erect tents (Mk 9:5), and he alone had sufficient faith to attempt walking on the water (Mt 14:28-31). It is Peter who asks the Lord to explain his teaching on forgiveness (Mt 18:21) and parables (Mt 15:15; Lk 12:41) and who speaks the disciples’ minds in Matthew 19:27, “Behold, we have left everything and followed you; what’s in it for us?” (paraphrased). The collectors of the temple tax come to Peter as leader of the group (Mt 17:24). As a member of the inner circle (with James and John, possibly Andrew in Mk 13:3) he was often alone with Jesus (at the raising of Jairus’s daughter, Mk 5:37 and parallels; at the Transfiguration, Mk 9:2 and parallels; at Gethsemane, Mk 14:33 and Mt 26:37). Jesus asks Peter and John to prepare the Passover meal in Luke 22:8, and in Mark 14:37 (and Mt 26:40) he directs his rebuke to Peter as representing the others (“Could ye not watch with me one hour?”). Finally, the message of the angel at the tomb as recorded in Mark 16:7 said, “Go your way, tell his disciples and Peter.” Certainly Peter held a very special place among the Twelve.<\/p>\n<p>This was especially evident in the Caesarea Philippi episode (Mk 8:27-33 and parallels). It was Peter whose confession became the high point of the Gospel accounts, “Thou art the Christ” (Luke adds “of God”; Matthew, “the Son of the living God”). After Jesus then spoke of the suffering of the Son of Man, Peter rebuked him, and in Mark’s description Jesus then turned, gazed at all the disciples, and said to Peter, “Get thee behind me, Satan: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but the things that be of men” (v 33, <span>kjv<\/span>). This was obviously directed at them all through Peter.<\/p>\n<p>The portrait of Peter that comes through all four accounts pictures him as impulsive, often rash; he is the first to act and speak his mind and was typified by his enthusiasm for everything in which he had a part. At the sight of Jesus walking on the water, Peter asked that the Lord command him to do the same and then immediately leaped out of the boat and began doing just that. At the Transfiguration, while the others were awed into silence by the appearance of Moses and Elijah, Peter the man of action said, “If thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles” (Mt 17:4, <span>kjv<\/span>). Mark and Luke both add here that Peter did not know what he was saying. Peter’s unguarded and unthinking tendency to protest Jesus’ statements is seen not only at Caesarea Philippi but also at the foot-washing scene in John 13:4-11 when he said first, “You shall never ever wash my feet”; and then after Jesus’ strong retort, “If I do not wash you, you have no part with Me,” he reversed himself completely, stating, “Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and head” (13:8-9, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Finally, in the account of the race to the tomb (Jn 20:2-10), the beloved disciple, reaching the tomb first, paused while Peter immediately and impulsively entered it. Peter was certainly one who “rushed in where angels fear to tread.” However, this very trait aligns him with all of us and may be one of the major reasons why he becomes the representative disciple throughout the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetertheRock\">Peter the Rock<\/p>\n<p>The key to the significance of Simon Peter is obviously the controversial addendum to the Caesarea Philippi episode, found only in Matthew 16:17-19, Jesus’ testimonial to Peter. There are several crucial aspects of this saying. The most important for this study is verse 18, “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church” (<span>kjv<\/span>). There have been many interpretations of this down through history: (1) It refers to Peter as the “rock” or first bishop of the church. This was the Roman Catholic interpretation from the third century on and was employed as a prooftext for apostolic succession, but it is not hinted at anywhere in the context or even in the epistles: it was not a first-century concept. (2) The majority of Protestants since the Reformation have taken this to be a reference to Peter’s statement of faith rather than to Peter himself; but this neglects the wordplay, which is even more pronounced in Aramaic, which has only one form for “Cephas” (rock). (3) An alternative has been to take “this rock” as a reference to Jesus himself, but that is fanciful and is hardly in the context. In conclusion, “this rock” is almost certainly a reference to Peter, but it must be understood in two ways. First, Peter was to become the foundation upon which Christ would build his church, a position clearly attested to in Acts. This does not mean that Peter had an authority above the other apostles. Paul’s rebuke of Peter in Galatians 2:11-14 demonstrates that he was not above them, and at the Jerusalem council in Acts 15 it is James who has the position of leadership. Second, Peter is seen here not merely as an individual but as the representative of the disciples. This view is coming to increasing prominence today. It recognized the Jewish concept of “corporate identity” in which the leader was identified with the corporate body (e.g., the king or high priest representing the nation before God). This concept is also in keeping with Matthew 18:18-20, which passes on the same authority to the church as is here given to Peter. In this view Peter as the rock becomes the first of the building blocks upon which Christ, the chief cornerstone (to continue the metaphor), will build his church (see Eph 2:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>Two other aspects are worthy of note here. First, verse 18 says, “the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” The “gates of hell” is a common Jewish euphemism for death’s inevitable and irrevocable power. Jesus is saying that Satan will not be triumphant over the church, and his sphere of operations, death, will be defeated (cf. 1 Cor 15:26, 54-55). The church would undergo persecution and martyrdom, but the church would be triumphant.<\/p>\n<p>Second, verse 19 promises, “I will give unto thee [singular] the keys of the kingdom,” another statement used of apostolic succession by the medieval church. Again, this must be understood in light of corporate identity; Peter, as the preeminent figure in the early church, here embodies the community in his leadership. The “keys of the kingdom” are in direct contrast to the “gates of hell” (cf. Rv 1:18, “the keys of hell and death” and Rv 3:7, the “key of David”), and this follows the imagery of the building seen in the rock upon which Christ will build his church. Here Peter is given the keys that will unlock the power of the kingdom in building God’s community, the church. The future tense (“will give”) undoubtedly points to the postresurrection period, when that power was unleashed and the church erected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetertheApostle\">Peter the Apostle<\/p>\n<p>Two events led to the new Peter who fills the pages of Acts: his reinstatement described in John 21:15-17 and the resurrection appearance of the Lord, which is never described but alluded to in Luke 24:34 and 1 Corinthians 15:5. His denial was certainly proof that he was not yet able to assume his predicted position as the rock of the church. Both Luke and Paul seem to state that the risen Lord appeared to Simon Peter before the others, which would be fitting in light of his preeminence in the early church. During the Palestinian era, the fifteen-year period prior to the Gentile mission, Peter was the leading figure. The others mentioned in Acts 1–12 are all secondary to Peter, the dominant director of church policy. These include John, who is with Peter in the temple (3:1), the prison (4:13), and Samaria (8:14); Stephen, who was one of the Seven and whose revolutionary preaching led to his martyrdom (chs 6–7); Philip, another of the Seven who proclaimed the gospel in Samaria and to the Ethiopian eunuch (ch 8); Barnabas, who set an example of communal sharing (4:36-37) and was an official delegate to Antioch (11:20-30); Paul, a miraculous convert and witness (9:1-30; 11:25-30; 12:25); and James, who became the first apostolic martyr (12:2). It is Peter who proposes the choice of the 12th disciple (1:15-17), who proclaims the gospel at Pentecost (2:14-40), who utters the healing word (3:6), and who defends the gospel before the Sanhedrin (4:8-12, 19-20; 5:29-32). The episode regarding Ananias and Sapphira is particularly poignant, for here Peter functions as the avenging messenger of God; nowhere is his authority more evident. We would also note his authority in the scene at Samaria concerning the attempt of Simon the Sorcerer to buy the charismatic power (8:18-24). Again, it is Peter whose influence commands the situation. In these two incidents we certainly see the “binding and loosing” jurisdiction (cf. Mt 16:19) exhibited in Peter.<\/p>\n<p>Yet Peter and the church still came under the strictures of their Jewish heritage. The evidence points to a Jewish proselyte self-consciousness on the part of the early church. They viewed themselves as the righteous remnant, living in the age of Messianic fulfillment, but still interpreted themselves in a Jewish sense and conducted their evangelism in the proselyte form of Jewish particularism (i.e., Gentiles could only be converted through Judaism). Two events altered this. First, the Hellenistic Jewish branch of the church rebelled against the Hebrew Christians, which resulted in the appointment of the seven deacons and a change in the orthodox policy of the Palestinian church. Second, this then led to a new preaching ministry, first by Stephen, whose insights ended in his martyrdom and the dispersal of the Hellenistic branch in chapter 8; then by Philip and others, who extended the gospel even further, to the Samaritans and God-fearers. As a further result, Peter and John came to Samaria (8:14), the next significant step toward the Gentile mission. Thus ended the centrality of Jerusalem in the unfolding story.<\/p>\n<p>The two miracles of Peter, at Lydda (the paralytic) and Joppa (raising the dead woman) in Acts 9:32-42, are probably intended to parallel similar miracles of Jesus in Luke’s first work (Lk 5:18-26; 8:49-56). This is part of a major theme in Acts whereby Jesus’ life and ministry are paralleled and continued in the work of the Spirit through the church. Again Peter is seen in a representative role.<\/p>\n<p>The new relationships are extended in two further scenes. First, Peter stays with “Simon, a tanner,” in Joppa, an unclean trade; no pious Jew would knowingly have social contact with such a one. Even more important, God teaches Peter through a dream (10:10-16) that the old dichotomy between clean and unclean has been broken. This then leads Peter to the home of an uncircumcised Gentile, the most serious social taboo for the Jew, and subsequent events force Peter to admit Gentiles into the church without the necessity of Jewish proselyte requirements. The serious consequences of this are seen in the debate that ensued in Jerusalem (Acts 11:2-3) and later at the council (Acts 15:1-21). The centrality of this event is demonstrated in the extent to which Luke reproduces Peter’s speech, which seems to be a repetition of chapter 10 but is meant to highlight this crucial episode. Often forgotten in the significance of this for the early church is the fact that for Luke the Gentile mission begins with Peter, not Paul. He is the one upon whom the salvific act of God descends; and as the leader of the church, he was the first important witness to it.<\/p>\n<p>The persecution of Herod Agrippa (Acts 12:1-4) was likely due to the furor caused by this free intercourse with Gentiles; and it ended the period of Peter’s leadership in Jerusalem. The Jewish people were greatly offended by the new Christian push; and according to Luke in Acts, the idyllic period of popularity, in which the common people supported the church, effectively ceased at this time. Peter’s miraculous release and the dramatic scene at Mary’s house typified the special place of Peter, but the momentum shifts. Peter is forced to flee Jerusalem, and in the interim James arises to leadership (Acts 12:17); at the Jerusalem council it is the latter who has the chair and presents the council’s decision (Acts 15:6-29).<\/p>\n<p>The exact relationship between Peter and the other disciples, especially with the so-called pillars—James and John—and the apostle Paul, cannot be ascertained. The evidence is too vague. Many have thought that indeed there were no truly universal leaders, for the early church was too diverse. However, that is unlikely, and Luke’s portrayal in Acts parallels Paul’s statement in Galatians 2:8 that Peter was the apostle par excellence to the “circumcised” and Paul to the “Gentiles.” They were the universal leaders, while James became the local leader of the Jerusalem eldership. However, neither Peter nor Paul had dominical status similar to that of later popes (i.e., neither was the absolute spokesman of the church and above criticism). So-called emissaries from James could have such an influence on Peter that he would hypocritically change his behavior before Gentiles (Gal 2:12), and Paul could rebuke Peter publicly for doing so (Gal 2:11-14). Paul never claimed authority over the other disciples and even sought their approval and “the right hands of fellowship” for his ministry to the Gentiles (Gal 2:1-10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersFutureMinistry\">Peter’s Future Ministry<\/p>\n<p>We have very little hard evidence for Peter’s other movements. It seems as though Peter gradually turned from leadership to missionary work. However, this is an oversimplification. It is most likely that, following the similar pattern of Paul, he combined the two. The presence of a “Cephas party” at Corinth (1 Cor 1:12; 3:22) may indicate that Peter had spent some time there. This is made even more likely when Paul uses Peter as the main example for taking one’s wife on missionary expeditions (1 Cor 9:5). The “Cephas party” probably consisted of those who were converted under his ministry; it is probable that they were Jewish Christians and opposed the “Paul party” on Jewish-Gentile debates reflected elsewhere in 1 Corinthians.<\/p>\n<p>The First Epistle of Peter was sent to churches in northern Asia Minor—the provinces of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia. The problem here is that there is no hint that Peter had been there and no personal notations in the epistle to demonstrate his acquaintance with these churches. However, it does show that he was very interested in them. In fact, some believe that the reason why Paul was not allowed into this district according to Acts 16:7-8 was that Peter was already ministering there. In short, the question of Peter’s involvement in Asia Minor must remain an open one.<\/p>\n<p>There is no final NT evidence that Peter went to Rome. First Peter 5:13 says that the epistle was sent from “Babylon,” and it is doubtful that this was the literal Babylon, because there is no tradition that Peter ever went there, and Babylon was sparsely populated back then. It is probably a cryptic symbol for Rome, the “Babylon of the West.” It is most likely that the “Babylon” of Revelation 14:8 and 16:19 is also a symbol of Rome. This would fit the strong tradition in the early church that indeed Peter did minister there.<\/p>\n<p>There are four early external witnesses concerning Peter’s death. John 21:18 mentions only the martyrdom of Peter but does not give any hint as to the place. First Clement was written at the end of the first century and reports the martyrdom of Peter and Paul among others. While 1 Clement 5:4 testifies only to the fact and not the place of Peter’s martyrdom, a study of two aspects favors Rome—the reference to a “great multitude” of martyrdoms, which best fits the Neronian persecution, and the phrase “glorious example among us,” which shows that the people of Clement’s own church (Rome) were involved. Ignatius’s letter to the Romans (4:3) also testifies generally to the martyrdom of Peter and Paul, and again the context favors Rome as the place. He says, “I did not command you as did Peter and Paul,” which shows that they had ministries in Rome. The Ascension of Isaiah 4:2-3, a Jewish Christian work of the same period, speaks of Beliar (probably Nero) who martyrs “one of the Twelve,” almost certainly Peter. Therefore the earliest evidence does not explicitly point to Rome as the place of Peter’s death, but that is the most likely hypothesis.<\/p>\n<p>Definite statements to that effect appear toward the end of the second century. Dionysius, bishop of Corinth, in a letter dated c. 170 (preserved in Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 2.25.8) says that Peter and Paul taught together in Italy. At the end of that century Irenaeus says (in <em>Against Heresies<\/em> 2.1-3) that Peter and Paul preached in Rome, and Tertullian in the same general period adds that Peter was martyred “like . . . the Lord” (<em>Scorpiace<\/em> 15). Clement of Alexandria and Origen both allude to Peter’s presence in Rome, and the latter adds the belief that he was “crucified head-downwards” (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 2.15.2; 3.1.2). The tradition that Peter was crucified may be supported in John 21:18: “when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall . . . carry thee wither thou wouldest not” (<span>kjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The fact that Paul’s Epistle to the Romans (c. 55–57) does not mention Peter tells us that he could not have gone there earlier than that. If 1 Peter was written during the Neronian persecution, as those who hold to Petrine authorship believe, he must have gone there sometime in the late 50s or early 60s. Of course, the extent of his ministry in Rome also cannot be known. Some indeed have posited that he had little or no extensive stay in Rome. The facts, as they can be recovered, point to certain tentative conclusions. Peter did have some type of ministry in Rome, though the extent of it cannot be known. However, it is doubtful, in light of the early testimony to his preaching ministry there, that he was merely passing through Rome when caught in Nero’s pogrom. Therefore he most likely spent the last years of his ministry in Rome and there suffered martyrdom under Nero, perhaps by crucifixion.<\/p>\n<p>Simon Peter, along with Paul, was the leading figure in the early church. His impact has been tragically dimmed by the acrimonious debates of Roman Catholic– Protestant circles, but the biblical evidence is clear. He was the leading disciple of Jesus and indeed the “rock” who provided the foundation for the church. As the representative disciple, his enthusiasm and even his weaknesses have made him the supreme example of the developing disciple, one who, through the power of the risen Lord, rose above his faults to become a towering figure on the church scene.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PETER, The Apostle One of the 12 disciples; rose to prominence both among the disciples during Jesus’ ministry and among the apostles afterwards. There are actually four forms of Peter’s name in the New Testament: the Hebrew translated into Greek, “Simeon” to “Simon,” and the Aramaic translated into Greek, “Cephas” to “Petros” (meaning “rock”). His given name was Simeon bar-Jonah (Mt 16:17; cf. Jn 1:42), “Simon the son of John,” which was common Semitic nomenclature. It is most likely that “S...","summary_en":"PETER, The Apostle One of the 12 disciples; rose to prominence both among the disciples during Jesus’ ministry and among the apostles afterwards. There are actually four forms of Peter’s name in the New Testament: the Hebrew translated into Greek, “Simeon” to “Simon,” and the Aramaic translated into Greek, “Cephas” to “Petros” (meaning “rock”). His given name was Simeon bar-Jonah (Mt 16:17; cf. Jn 1:42), “Simon the son of John,” which was common Semitic nomenclature. It is most likely that “S...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65935,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","title_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","content_ro":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","summary_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93561,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","title_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","content_ro":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","summary_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121187,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","title_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","content_ro":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","summary_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148813,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","title_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","content_ro":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","summary_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"42":[{"id":42095,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69721,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97347,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":124973,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":1592,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Andrew, the Apostle","title_en":"Andrew, the Apostle","content_ro":"<h3>ANDREW, T<span>he<\/span> A<span>postle<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>One of Christ’s 12 apostles. Andrew first appears in the NT as a disciple of John the Baptist (Jn 1:35, 40). After hearing John say, “Look, there is the Lamb of God!” (Jn 1:36), referring to Jesus, Andrew and another unnamed disciple followed Jesus and stayed with him for a day (Jn 1:36-39). Andrew then told his brother, Simon Peter, that he had found the Messiah and brought Peter to Jesus (Jn 1:40-42). From then on Andrew faded into the background, and his brother came into prominence. Whenever the relationship of the two is mentioned, Andrew is always described as the brother of Simon Peter and never the other way around (Mt 4:18; Mk 1:16; Jn 1:40; 6:8), although Andrew is also mentioned without reference to his relationship to Peter (Mk 1:29; 3:18; 13:3; Jn 12:22). Andrew’s father was John (Mt 16:17; Jn 1:42; 21:15-17), and his hometown was Bethsaida (Jn 1:44), a village on the north shore of the Sea of Galilee.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John mentions disciples being with Jesus (2:2; 4:2), and it is likely that Andrew was one of that early group. Evidently, however, he returned to his activity as a fisherman on the Sea of Galilee, where he shared a house with Peter and his family in Capernaum (Mt 4:18-20; Mk 1:16-18, 29-33). While they were fishing, Andrew and Peter received a definite call to follow Jesus and become those who fish for people. From among the disciples of Jesus a group of 12 were later specially chosen as apostles. Andrew is always listed among the first four named, along with Peter and two other brothers, John and James (Mt 10:2-4; Lk 6:13-16; Acts 1:13).<\/p>\n<p>Andrew is named in only three other contexts in the Gospels. At the feeding of the 5,000 he called attention to the boy who had five barley loaves and two fish (Jn 6:8-9). When certain Greeks came to Philip, asking to see Jesus, Philip told Andrew and then the two of them told Jesus (Jn 12:20-22). Finally, Andrew is listed among those who were questioning Jesus privately on the Mt of Olives (Mk 13:3-4). The last NT mention of Andrew is in the list of apostles waiting in the upper room in Jerusalem for the promised outpouring of the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:12-14).<\/p>\n<p>Various documents associated with Andrew, such as the Acts of Andrew mentioned by the early church historian Eusebius, are of doubtful value. Some traditions indicate that Andrew ministered in Scythia. According to the Muratorian Canon, Andrew received a revelation at night that the apostle John should write the fourth Gospel. Tradition is rather uniform that Andrew died at Patrae in Achaia. A story developed that he was martyred on an X-shaped cross (a “decussate” or “saltire” cross), which has become known as St Andrew’s Cross. Another tradition is that an arm of the dead Andrew was taken into Scotland as a relic by Regulus, and thus Andrew became known as a patron saint of Scotland. On the calendar of saints of the Roman and Greek churches, Andrew’s date is set as November 30. <em>See<\/em> Apocrypha (Specific Titles of Apocryphal Writings): Andrew, Acts of; Andrew, Story of; Andrew and Matthias, Acts of; Andrew and Paul, Acts of.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Apostle, Apostleship.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ANDREW, T<span>he<\/span> A<span>postle<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>One of Christ’s 12 apostles. Andrew first appears in the NT as a disciple of John the Baptist (Jn 1:35, 40). After hearing John say, “Look, there is the Lamb of God!” (Jn 1:36), referring to Jesus, Andrew and another unnamed disciple followed Jesus and stayed with him for a day (Jn 1:36-39). Andrew then told his brother, Simon Peter, that he had found the Messiah and brought Peter to Jesus (Jn 1:40-42). From then on Andrew faded into the background, and his brother came into prominence. Whenever the relationship of the two is mentioned, Andrew is always described as the brother of Simon Peter and never the other way around (Mt 4:18; Mk 1:16; Jn 1:40; 6:8), although Andrew is also mentioned without reference to his relationship to Peter (Mk 1:29; 3:18; 13:3; Jn 12:22). Andrew’s father was John (Mt 16:17; Jn 1:42; 21:15-17), and his hometown was Bethsaida (Jn 1:44), a village on the north shore of the Sea of Galilee.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John mentions disciples being with Jesus (2:2; 4:2), and it is likely that Andrew was one of that early group. Evidently, however, he returned to his activity as a fisherman on the Sea of Galilee, where he shared a house with Peter and his family in Capernaum (Mt 4:18-20; Mk 1:16-18, 29-33). While they were fishing, Andrew and Peter received a definite call to follow Jesus and become those who fish for people. From among the disciples of Jesus a group of 12 were later specially chosen as apostles. Andrew is always listed among the first four named, along with Peter and two other brothers, John and James (Mt 10:2-4; Lk 6:13-16; Acts 1:13).<\/p>\n<p>Andrew is named in only three other contexts in the Gospels. At the feeding of the 5,000 he called attention to the boy who had five barley loaves and two fish (Jn 6:8-9). When certain Greeks came to Philip, asking to see Jesus, Philip told Andrew and then the two of them told Jesus (Jn 12:20-22). Finally, Andrew is listed among those who were questioning Jesus privately on the Mt of Olives (Mk 13:3-4). The last NT mention of Andrew is in the list of apostles waiting in the upper room in Jerusalem for the promised outpouring of the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:12-14).<\/p>\n<p>Various documents associated with Andrew, such as the Acts of Andrew mentioned by the early church historian Eusebius, are of doubtful value. Some traditions indicate that Andrew ministered in Scythia. According to the Muratorian Canon, Andrew received a revelation at night that the apostle John should write the fourth Gospel. Tradition is rather uniform that Andrew died at Patrae in Achaia. A story developed that he was martyred on an X-shaped cross (a “decussate” or “saltire” cross), which has become known as St Andrew’s Cross. Another tradition is that an arm of the dead Andrew was taken into Scotland as a relic by Regulus, and thus Andrew became known as a patron saint of Scotland. On the calendar of saints of the Roman and Greek churches, Andrew’s date is set as November 30. <em>See<\/em> Apocrypha (Specific Titles of Apocryphal Writings): Andrew, Acts of; Andrew, Story of; Andrew and Matthias, Acts of; Andrew and Paul, Acts of.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Apostle, Apostleship.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ANDREW, The Apostle One of Christ’s 12 apostles. Andrew first appears in the NT as a disciple of John the Baptist (Jn 1:35, 40). After hearing John say, “Look, there is the Lamb of God!” (Jn 1:36), referring to Jesus, Andrew and another unnamed disciple followed Jesus and stayed with him for a day (Jn 1:36-39). Andrew then told his brother, Simon Peter, that he had found the Messiah and brought Peter to Jesus (Jn 1:40-42). From then on Andrew faded into the background, and his brother came in...","summary_en":"ANDREW, The Apostle One of Christ’s 12 apostles. Andrew first appears in the NT as a disciple of John the Baptist (Jn 1:35, 40). After hearing John say, “Look, there is the Lamb of God!” (Jn 1:36), referring to Jesus, Andrew and another unnamed disciple followed Jesus and stayed with him for a day (Jn 1:36-39). Andrew then told his brother, Simon Peter, that he had found the Messiah and brought Peter to Jesus (Jn 1:40-42). From then on Andrew faded into the background, and his brother came in...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":3817,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Bar-Jona*","title_en":"Bar-Jona*","content_ro":"<h3>BAR-JONA*<\/h3>\n<p>Aramaic form of Simon Peter’s surname, meaning “son of Jonah” (Mt 16:17). Another variant of the name appears in John 1:42 and 21:15-17, where the best Greek texts have “son of John” rather than “son of Jona[s]” (<span>kjv<\/span>). <em>See<\/em> Simon Peter.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BAR-JONA*<\/h3>\n<p>Aramaic form of Simon Peter’s surname, meaning “son of Jonah” (Mt 16:17). Another variant of the name appears in John 1:42 and 21:15-17, where the best Greek texts have “son of John” rather than “son of Jona[s]” (<span>kjv<\/span>). <em>See<\/em> Simon Peter.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BAR-JONA* Aramaic form of Simon Peter’s surname, meaning “son of Jonah” (Mt 16:17). Another variant of the name appears in John 1:42 and 21:15-17, where the best Greek texts have “son of John” rather than “son of Jona[s]” (kjv). See Simon Peter.","summary_en":"BAR-JONA* Aramaic form of Simon Peter’s surname, meaning “son of Jonah” (Mt 16:17). Another variant of the name appears in John 1:42 and 21:15-17, where the best Greek texts have “son of John” rather than “son of Jona[s]” (kjv). See Simon Peter.","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":6175,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Cephas","title_en":"Cephas","content_ro":"<h3>CEPHAS<\/h3>\n<p>Aramaic name of Simon Peter the apostle in John 1:42; 1 Corinthians 1:12; and Galatians 1:18. <em>See<\/em> Simon Peter.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CEPHAS<\/h3>\n<p>Aramaic name of Simon Peter the apostle in John 1:42; 1 Corinthians 1:12; and Galatians 1:18. <em>See<\/em> Simon Peter.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CEPHAS Aramaic name of Simon Peter the apostle in John 1:42; 1 Corinthians 1:12; and Galatians 1:18. See Simon Peter.","summary_en":"CEPHAS Aramaic name of Simon Peter the apostle in John 1:42; 1 Corinthians 1:12; and Galatians 1:18. See Simon Peter.","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20435,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jona*","title_en":"Jona*","content_ro":"<h3>JONA*<\/h3>\n<p>KJV form of John, father of Simon Peter and Andrew, in John 1:42. <em>See<\/em> John (Person) #1.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JONA*<\/h3>\n<p>KJV form of John, father of Simon Peter and Andrew, in John 1:42. <em>See<\/em> John (Person) #1.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JONA* KJV form of John, father of Simon Peter and Andrew, in John 1:42. See John (Person) #1.","summary_en":"JONA* KJV form of John, father of Simon Peter and Andrew, in John 1:42. See John (Person) #1.","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":26941,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Significance of Names","title_en":"Significance of Names","content_ro":"<h3>NAMES, Significance of<\/h3>\n<p>In biblical times names were given in order to express something about a person, or to express something through him, and not simply to hang a convenient label around his neck. At least seven motivations appear in the choice of names:<\/p>\n<p>1. To record some aspect of a person’s birth. Moses was so called by his adoptive mother because he was drawn from the water, the sound of the name recalling a Hebrew verb “to draw out” (Ex 2:10). The circumstances surrounding their births gave Jacob (Gn 25:26) and also Samuel (1 Sm 1:20) their names. In Samuel’s case it is interesting to note that his name, meaning “heard by God,” records not the offering of prayer but the hearing and answering of it. Something of the deeper and more far-reaching implications of naming is seen in the fact that while the names Jacob and Samuel arise from birth circumstances, they also reveal in advance the person the child will become: Jacob the sneaky opportunist (cf. Gn 27:36), Samuel the man of prayer (1 Sm 7:5-9; 8:6, 21; 12:19-23).<\/p>\n<li>2. To express parental reactions to the birth. Isaac means “laughter” (cf. Gn 17:17; 18:12; 21:3-6). Nabal (1 Sm 25:25), which means “fool,” must have been the essence of a mother’s prayer—“Let him not be a fool”—though sadly he was! Abimelech (Jgs 8:31) means “My father is king” and may express a secret ambition of Gideon’s, at variance with his public testimony (Jgs 8:22-23).<\/li>\n<li>3. To secure the solidarity of the family. This may explain the proposal to call the baby Zechariah in Luke 1:59.<\/li>\n<li>4. To reveal the nature of the person, his function, or some other significant thing about him. The preeminent example of this is Jesus (Mt 1:21), named for his saving vocation. Isaiah seems to have seen his own name as significant of his message “the Lord saves” (see Is 8:18 <span>nlt<\/span> mg).<\/li>\n<li>5. To communicate God’s message. Isaiah (see Is 7:3) called his first son Shear-jashub (“a remnant shall return”) in order to embody the double-sided thrust of his message: as a result of faithlessness, the people will be reduced to a mere remnant (“only a remnant shall return”); as a result of God’s faithfulness, his people will be preserved in life (“a remnant shall indeed return”). He called his second boy Maher-shalal-hash-baz (8:3), (“speed-prey-haste-spoil”), indicating the certainty of the imminent onset of a victorious foe.<\/li>\n<li>6. To establish religious affiliation. All the names in the Bible with the endings <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">-iah<\/span> (alternatively <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">-jah<\/span>) or <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">-el<\/span> (e.g., Jeremiah, Nathanael) are in fact statements with “the Lord” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">-yah<\/span><em>)<\/em> or “God” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">-el<\/span><em>)<\/em> as subject. For example, Adonijah (2 Sm 3:4) means “the Lord is Sovereign”; Nathanael (Jn 1:47) means “God gave.” Such names were often chosen in times of religious decline in order to affirm the true faith of the parents.<\/li>\n<li>7. To affirm authority over another. In the ancient Near East, the naming of an object or person implied power and authority over what was named (Gn 2:19-20). Thus, a person not knowing another’s name could do neither harm nor good to that person (Ex 33:12, 17). In the ancient world a name described the person or his work in some way. When the individual or his situation changed, so did the name, as with Abram (Abraham) and Jacob (Israel). Pharaoh, as master of the patriarch Joseph, changed Joseph’s name when his status altered, calling him Zaphenath-paneah (Gn 41:45). When Eliakim was made king of Judah, the pharaoh changed the Jewish king’s name to Jehoiakim (2 Kgs 23:34). In captivity, Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah were forced to change their names to Belteshazzar, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego by order of the eunuch (Dn 1:6-7).<\/li>\n<p>In the NT, John the Baptist was named by an angel who represented God, and similarly Jesus was given his name by an angel. The naming of those children symbolized God’s authority over John the Baptist and his special relationship as Father to Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewNames\">New Names<\/p>\n<p>The ability of the name to reveal the nature or status of the person who bears it is well illustrated in the biblical practice of giving new names, as when Sarai became Sarah (Gn 17:15). Three motivations are possible:<\/p>\n<p>1. The new name replaces the old in order to signify the bestowal of powers not hitherto possessed. In this case the new name is equivalent to the experience of regeneration. The childless Abram becomes the “father of a multitude of nations,” Abraham (Gn 17:5).<\/p>\n<li>2. The new name may indicate a new character and status with God, as when Jacob the trickster became Israel the man of power with God (Gn 32:27; Hos 12:3-4); thus also, Simon became Peter (Jn 1:42).<\/li>\n<li>3. The new name may cement a new loyalty in the place of an old. Daniel the captive was given the name Belteshazzar, incorporating the name Bel, one of the gods of Babylon—presumably to turn him from the God of his fathers to that of his captors (Dn 1:7).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Names of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NAMES, Significance of<\/h3>\n<p>In biblical times names were given in order to express something about a person, or to express something through him, and not simply to hang a convenient label around his neck. At least seven motivations appear in the choice of names:<\/p>\n<p>1. To record some aspect of a person’s birth. Moses was so called by his adoptive mother because he was drawn from the water, the sound of the name recalling a Hebrew verb “to draw out” (Ex 2:10). The circumstances surrounding their births gave Jacob (Gn 25:26) and also Samuel (1 Sm 1:20) their names. In Samuel’s case it is interesting to note that his name, meaning “heard by God,” records not the offering of prayer but the hearing and answering of it. Something of the deeper and more far-reaching implications of naming is seen in the fact that while the names Jacob and Samuel arise from birth circumstances, they also reveal in advance the person the child will become: Jacob the sneaky opportunist (cf. Gn 27:36), Samuel the man of prayer (1 Sm 7:5-9; 8:6, 21; 12:19-23).<\/p>\n<li>2. To express parental reactions to the birth. Isaac means “laughter” (cf. Gn 17:17; 18:12; 21:3-6). Nabal (1 Sm 25:25), which means “fool,” must have been the essence of a mother’s prayer—“Let him not be a fool”—though sadly he was! Abimelech (Jgs 8:31) means “My father is king” and may express a secret ambition of Gideon’s, at variance with his public testimony (Jgs 8:22-23).<\/li>\n<li>3. To secure the solidarity of the family. This may explain the proposal to call the baby Zechariah in Luke 1:59.<\/li>\n<li>4. To reveal the nature of the person, his function, or some other significant thing about him. The preeminent example of this is Jesus (Mt 1:21), named for his saving vocation. Isaiah seems to have seen his own name as significant of his message “the Lord saves” (see Is 8:18 <span>nlt<\/span> mg).<\/li>\n<li>5. To communicate God’s message. Isaiah (see Is 7:3) called his first son Shear-jashub (“a remnant shall return”) in order to embody the double-sided thrust of his message: as a result of faithlessness, the people will be reduced to a mere remnant (“only a remnant shall return”); as a result of God’s faithfulness, his people will be preserved in life (“a remnant shall indeed return”). He called his second boy Maher-shalal-hash-baz (8:3), (“speed-prey-haste-spoil”), indicating the certainty of the imminent onset of a victorious foe.<\/li>\n<li>6. To establish religious affiliation. All the names in the Bible with the endings <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">-iah<\/span> (alternatively <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">-jah<\/span>) or <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">-el<\/span> (e.g., Jeremiah, Nathanael) are in fact statements with “the Lord” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">-yah<\/span><em>)<\/em> or “God” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">-el<\/span><em>)<\/em> as subject. For example, Adonijah (2 Sm 3:4) means “the Lord is Sovereign”; Nathanael (Jn 1:47) means “God gave.” Such names were often chosen in times of religious decline in order to affirm the true faith of the parents.<\/li>\n<li>7. To affirm authority over another. In the ancient Near East, the naming of an object or person implied power and authority over what was named (Gn 2:19-20). Thus, a person not knowing another’s name could do neither harm nor good to that person (Ex 33:12, 17). In the ancient world a name described the person or his work in some way. When the individual or his situation changed, so did the name, as with Abram (Abraham) and Jacob (Israel). Pharaoh, as master of the patriarch Joseph, changed Joseph’s name when his status altered, calling him Zaphenath-paneah (Gn 41:45). When Eliakim was made king of Judah, the pharaoh changed the Jewish king’s name to Jehoiakim (2 Kgs 23:34). In captivity, Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah were forced to change their names to Belteshazzar, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego by order of the eunuch (Dn 1:6-7).<\/li>\n<p>In the NT, John the Baptist was named by an angel who represented God, and similarly Jesus was given his name by an angel. The naming of those children symbolized God’s authority over John the Baptist and his special relationship as Father to Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewNames\">New Names<\/p>\n<p>The ability of the name to reveal the nature or status of the person who bears it is well illustrated in the biblical practice of giving new names, as when Sarai became Sarah (Gn 17:15). Three motivations are possible:<\/p>\n<p>1. The new name replaces the old in order to signify the bestowal of powers not hitherto possessed. In this case the new name is equivalent to the experience of regeneration. The childless Abram becomes the “father of a multitude of nations,” Abraham (Gn 17:5).<\/p>\n<li>2. The new name may indicate a new character and status with God, as when Jacob the trickster became Israel the man of power with God (Gn 32:27; Hos 12:3-4); thus also, Simon became Peter (Jn 1:42).<\/li>\n<li>3. The new name may cement a new loyalty in the place of an old. Daniel the captive was given the name Belteshazzar, incorporating the name Bel, one of the gods of Babylon—presumably to turn him from the God of his fathers to that of his captors (Dn 1:7).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Names of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"NAMES, Significance of In biblical times names were given in order to express something about a person, or to express something through him, and not simply to hang a convenient label around his neck. At least seven motivations appear in the choice of names: 1. To record some aspect of a person’s birth. Moses was so called by his adoptive mother because he was drawn from the water, the sound of the name recalling a Hebrew verb “to draw out” (Ex 2:10). The circumstances surrounding their births...","summary_en":"NAMES, Significance of In biblical times names were given in order to express something about a person, or to express something through him, and not simply to hang a convenient label around his neck. At least seven motivations appear in the choice of names: 1. To record some aspect of a person’s birth. Moses was so called by his adoptive mother because he was drawn from the water, the sound of the name recalling a Hebrew verb “to draw out” (Ex 2:10). The circumstances surrounding their births...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":30000,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Peter, the Apostle","title_en":"Peter, the Apostle","content_ro":"<h3>PETER, <span>The Apostle<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>One of the 12 disciples; rose to prominence both among the disciples during Jesus’ ministry and among the apostles afterwards.<\/p>\n<p>There are actually four forms of Peter’s name in the New Testament: the Hebrew translated into Greek, “Simeon” to “Simon,” and the Aramaic translated into Greek, “Cephas” to “Petros” (meaning “rock”). His given name was Simeon bar-Jonah (Mt 16:17; cf. Jn 1:42), “Simon the son of John,” which was common Semitic nomenclature. It is most likely that “Simon” was not merely the Greek equivalent of “Simeon” but that, having his home in bilingual Galilee, “Simon” was the alternate form he used in dealings with Gentiles. In fact, it was quite common for a cosmopolitan Jew to employ three forms of his name depending on the occasion: Aramaic, Latin, and Greek. The double name “Simon Peter” (or “Simon called Peter”) demonstrates that the second name was a later addition, similar to “Jesus, the Christ.” The number of times that the Aramaic equivalent “Cephas” is used (once in John, four times each in Galatians and 1 Corinthians), as well as its translation into the Greek (not common with proper names), indicates the importance of the secondary name. Both Aramaic and Greek forms mean “the rock,” an obvious indication of Peter’s stature in the early church (see below on Mt 16:18). It is obvious that he was called “Simon” throughout Jesus’ ministry but came to be known as “Peter” more and more in the apostolic age.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Background<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Conversion and Call<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Place among the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>• Peter the Rock<\/p>\n<p>• Peter the Apostle<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Future Ministry<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersBackground\">Peter’s Background<\/p>\n<p>Peter was raised in bilingual Galilee. John 1:44 says that the home of Andrew (his brother) and Peter was Bethsaida, the whereabouts of which is difficult to place archaeologically. The only site about which we know is east of the Jordan in the district called Gaulanitis. Yet John 12:21 places Bethsaida in Galilee; however, it is possible that John is reflecting the popular use of the term “Galilee” rather than the legally correct one. Peter and Andrew had a fishing business centered in Capernaum (Mk 1:21, 29) and perhaps were partners with James and John (Lk 5:10). It is also likely that they intermittently continued in their business while disciples, as indicated in the fishing scene in John 21:1-8.<\/p>\n<p>One difficulty with this is the series of statements saying, “We have left all and followed You” (Mt 19:27; Mk 10:28; Lk 18:28, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The majority of interpreters have given this an absolute sense of “sold” or “left” their business. However, Luke 18:28 occurs in the context of leaving their homes but obviously is not meant in an absolute sense. It seems most likely that the disciples did leave the practice of their fishing businesses to follow Christ, but kept the tools of their trade and returned to their trades when necessary.<\/p>\n<p>They certainly did not abandon their families, as evidenced by Peter, who returned to his home at the end of each tour. The New Testament tells us that Peter was married. In Mark 1:29-31 Jesus heals his mother-in-law, who perhaps was living with Peter. In fact, it is possible that his home became Jesus’ headquarters in Galilee. (Matthew 8:14 may indicate that Jesus dwelt there.) First Corinthians 9:5 says that Peter, along with the other married apostles, often took his wife with him on his missionary journeys. Later tradition speaks of his children (Clement of Alexandria’s <em>Stromateis<\/em> 2.6.52) and says that Peter was present at the martyrdom of his wife (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 3.30.2).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersConversionandCall\">Peter’s Conversion and Call<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s brother, Andrew, was a disciple of John the Baptist, according to John 1:35-40. This follows the witness of John in 1:29-34 and is the second stage of John’s discipleship drama in chapter one—i.e., after bearing witness he now sends his own followers to Jesus. Andrew and the unnamed disciple (perhaps Philip as in Jn 1:43 or the “beloved disciple,” whom many identify with John himself) then “follow” Jesus (a term used often in John for discipleship). The next day Andrew follows the Baptist’s example and finds his brother Simon, saying, “We have found the Messiah” (Jn 1:41, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Peter’s conversion is presupposed in John 1:42, where Simon is brought to Jesus by Andrew and there given a new name.<\/p>\n<p>There are three separate episodes in the Gospels in which Simon is called, and these overlap with three episodes in which he is given the name “Cephas” (“Peter,” which means “rock”) by Jesus. John locates the event in Judea where John the Baptist was baptizing. The synoptic Gospels have two different scenes. The first call takes place at the Sea of Galilee (Mk 1:16-20; Mt 4:18-22). Jesus is walking along the shore and sees Peter and Andrew along with James and John casting their nets into the sea. At this time he calls them to become “fishers of men.” Luke then expands this into a fishing scene (Lk 5:1-11), in which the disciples have fished all night and caught nothing but at the command of Jesus lower their nets and catch an amount of fish so great that the boat starts to sink. The episode concludes exactly like the Markan abbreviated form: Jesus says that from now on they will “catch men,” and as a result they leave everything and follow him.<\/p>\n<p>The second synoptic episode involving Peter’s call (and his new name) is the official choice of the Twelve upon the mountain (Mk 3:13-19 and parallels); in the list of the names we have “Simon he surnamed Peter.” The final occurrence dealing with Peter’s new name is found in Matthew 16:17-19, in connection with Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi.<\/p>\n<p>It is somewhat difficult to harmonize these episodes properly. Were there three different episodes in which Simon was called (Jn 1:42; Mk 1:20; 3:16) and three separate incidents in which he was given the name Cephas\/Peter (Jn 1:42; Mk 3:16; Mt 16:18)? It is attractive to a broad spectrum of academia to assume that one single event, which happened at some indeterminate time toward the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, was later expanded into these diverse traditions. However, a closer examination of the Gospel data does not necessitate such a conclusion. John 1:35-42 is not an institutional scene that connotes an official call. Rather, it describes the first encounter with Jesus and realization regarding his significance. The “renaming” is in the future tense and looks to a later event. Moreover, John deliberately omits most of the crisis events in Jesus’ life (the baptism, the choice of the Twelve, the Transfiguration, the words of institution at the Last Supper, Gethsemane) and replaces them with highly theological scenes that teach the spiritual significance of the events. This is what he has done here.<\/p>\n<p>The same is true of the first synoptic call, i.e., the fishing scene. Again, there is no hint of official ordination to office here but rather a proleptic or prophetic hint of future ministry. This is especially true of the highly theological scene in Luke, which promises abundant results. Again in all three accounts the future tense is employed: “I will make you fishers of men” (Matthew and Mark), “You will catch men” (Luke, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The call in Mark 1:20 and Matthew 4:21 and their reaction (leaving all behind and following Jesus) is the opening gambit that is finalized in the actual institutional scene in Mark 3:13-19 and parallels. The wording does not indicate that these two episodes are doublets, for the actual appointment of the disciples occurs in the second passage. We must differentiate between the original call to one segment (who became the so-called “inner circle” of the Twelve) and the final choice of all the disciples.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersPlaceamongtheTwelve\">Peter’s Place among the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>The prominence of Simon Peter in the Gospels and Acts cannot be disputed. While some have attempted to attribute this to his leadership role in the later church, there is no basis for that in the text of the NT. From the very beginning Simon attained preeminence above the others. In the lists of the Twelve just mentioned, Simon’s name always appears first, and in Matthew 10:2 it introduces his name as “the first.” Moreover, the Twelve are often designated “Peter and those with him” (Mk 1:36; Lk 9:32; 8:45, <span>nkjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Throughout the accounts Peter acted and spoke on behalf of the other disciples. At the Transfiguration it is Peter who wanted to erect tents (Mk 9:5), and he alone had sufficient faith to attempt walking on the water (Mt 14:28-31). It is Peter who asks the Lord to explain his teaching on forgiveness (Mt 18:21) and parables (Mt 15:15; Lk 12:41) and who speaks the disciples’ minds in Matthew 19:27, “Behold, we have left everything and followed you; what’s in it for us?” (paraphrased). The collectors of the temple tax come to Peter as leader of the group (Mt 17:24). As a member of the inner circle (with James and John, possibly Andrew in Mk 13:3) he was often alone with Jesus (at the raising of Jairus’s daughter, Mk 5:37 and parallels; at the Transfiguration, Mk 9:2 and parallels; at Gethsemane, Mk 14:33 and Mt 26:37). Jesus asks Peter and John to prepare the Passover meal in Luke 22:8, and in Mark 14:37 (and Mt 26:40) he directs his rebuke to Peter as representing the others (“Could ye not watch with me one hour?”). Finally, the message of the angel at the tomb as recorded in Mark 16:7 said, “Go your way, tell his disciples and Peter.” Certainly Peter held a very special place among the Twelve.<\/p>\n<p>This was especially evident in the Caesarea Philippi episode (Mk 8:27-33 and parallels). It was Peter whose confession became the high point of the Gospel accounts, “Thou art the Christ” (Luke adds “of God”; Matthew, “the Son of the living God”). After Jesus then spoke of the suffering of the Son of Man, Peter rebuked him, and in Mark’s description Jesus then turned, gazed at all the disciples, and said to Peter, “Get thee behind me, Satan: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but the things that be of men” (v 33, <span>kjv<\/span>). This was obviously directed at them all through Peter.<\/p>\n<p>The portrait of Peter that comes through all four accounts pictures him as impulsive, often rash; he is the first to act and speak his mind and was typified by his enthusiasm for everything in which he had a part. At the sight of Jesus walking on the water, Peter asked that the Lord command him to do the same and then immediately leaped out of the boat and began doing just that. At the Transfiguration, while the others were awed into silence by the appearance of Moses and Elijah, Peter the man of action said, “If thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles” (Mt 17:4, <span>kjv<\/span>). Mark and Luke both add here that Peter did not know what he was saying. Peter’s unguarded and unthinking tendency to protest Jesus’ statements is seen not only at Caesarea Philippi but also at the foot-washing scene in John 13:4-11 when he said first, “You shall never ever wash my feet”; and then after Jesus’ strong retort, “If I do not wash you, you have no part with Me,” he reversed himself completely, stating, “Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and head” (13:8-9, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Finally, in the account of the race to the tomb (Jn 20:2-10), the beloved disciple, reaching the tomb first, paused while Peter immediately and impulsively entered it. Peter was certainly one who “rushed in where angels fear to tread.” However, this very trait aligns him with all of us and may be one of the major reasons why he becomes the representative disciple throughout the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetertheRock\">Peter the Rock<\/p>\n<p>The key to the significance of Simon Peter is obviously the controversial addendum to the Caesarea Philippi episode, found only in Matthew 16:17-19, Jesus’ testimonial to Peter. There are several crucial aspects of this saying. The most important for this study is verse 18, “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church” (<span>kjv<\/span>). There have been many interpretations of this down through history: (1) It refers to Peter as the “rock” or first bishop of the church. This was the Roman Catholic interpretation from the third century on and was employed as a prooftext for apostolic succession, but it is not hinted at anywhere in the context or even in the epistles: it was not a first-century concept. (2) The majority of Protestants since the Reformation have taken this to be a reference to Peter’s statement of faith rather than to Peter himself; but this neglects the wordplay, which is even more pronounced in Aramaic, which has only one form for “Cephas” (rock). (3) An alternative has been to take “this rock” as a reference to Jesus himself, but that is fanciful and is hardly in the context. In conclusion, “this rock” is almost certainly a reference to Peter, but it must be understood in two ways. First, Peter was to become the foundation upon which Christ would build his church, a position clearly attested to in Acts. This does not mean that Peter had an authority above the other apostles. Paul’s rebuke of Peter in Galatians 2:11-14 demonstrates that he was not above them, and at the Jerusalem council in Acts 15 it is James who has the position of leadership. Second, Peter is seen here not merely as an individual but as the representative of the disciples. This view is coming to increasing prominence today. It recognized the Jewish concept of “corporate identity” in which the leader was identified with the corporate body (e.g., the king or high priest representing the nation before God). This concept is also in keeping with Matthew 18:18-20, which passes on the same authority to the church as is here given to Peter. In this view Peter as the rock becomes the first of the building blocks upon which Christ, the chief cornerstone (to continue the metaphor), will build his church (see Eph 2:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>Two other aspects are worthy of note here. First, verse 18 says, “the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” The “gates of hell” is a common Jewish euphemism for death’s inevitable and irrevocable power. Jesus is saying that Satan will not be triumphant over the church, and his sphere of operations, death, will be defeated (cf. 1 Cor 15:26, 54-55). The church would undergo persecution and martyrdom, but the church would be triumphant.<\/p>\n<p>Second, verse 19 promises, “I will give unto thee [singular] the keys of the kingdom,” another statement used of apostolic succession by the medieval church. Again, this must be understood in light of corporate identity; Peter, as the preeminent figure in the early church, here embodies the community in his leadership. The “keys of the kingdom” are in direct contrast to the “gates of hell” (cf. Rv 1:18, “the keys of hell and death” and Rv 3:7, the “key of David”), and this follows the imagery of the building seen in the rock upon which Christ will build his church. Here Peter is given the keys that will unlock the power of the kingdom in building God’s community, the church. The future tense (“will give”) undoubtedly points to the postresurrection period, when that power was unleashed and the church erected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetertheApostle\">Peter the Apostle<\/p>\n<p>Two events led to the new Peter who fills the pages of Acts: his reinstatement described in John 21:15-17 and the resurrection appearance of the Lord, which is never described but alluded to in Luke 24:34 and 1 Corinthians 15:5. His denial was certainly proof that he was not yet able to assume his predicted position as the rock of the church. Both Luke and Paul seem to state that the risen Lord appeared to Simon Peter before the others, which would be fitting in light of his preeminence in the early church. During the Palestinian era, the fifteen-year period prior to the Gentile mission, Peter was the leading figure. The others mentioned in Acts 1–12 are all secondary to Peter, the dominant director of church policy. These include John, who is with Peter in the temple (3:1), the prison (4:13), and Samaria (8:14); Stephen, who was one of the Seven and whose revolutionary preaching led to his martyrdom (chs 6–7); Philip, another of the Seven who proclaimed the gospel in Samaria and to the Ethiopian eunuch (ch 8); Barnabas, who set an example of communal sharing (4:36-37) and was an official delegate to Antioch (11:20-30); Paul, a miraculous convert and witness (9:1-30; 11:25-30; 12:25); and James, who became the first apostolic martyr (12:2). It is Peter who proposes the choice of the 12th disciple (1:15-17), who proclaims the gospel at Pentecost (2:14-40), who utters the healing word (3:6), and who defends the gospel before the Sanhedrin (4:8-12, 19-20; 5:29-32). The episode regarding Ananias and Sapphira is particularly poignant, for here Peter functions as the avenging messenger of God; nowhere is his authority more evident. We would also note his authority in the scene at Samaria concerning the attempt of Simon the Sorcerer to buy the charismatic power (8:18-24). Again, it is Peter whose influence commands the situation. In these two incidents we certainly see the “binding and loosing” jurisdiction (cf. Mt 16:19) exhibited in Peter.<\/p>\n<p>Yet Peter and the church still came under the strictures of their Jewish heritage. The evidence points to a Jewish proselyte self-consciousness on the part of the early church. They viewed themselves as the righteous remnant, living in the age of Messianic fulfillment, but still interpreted themselves in a Jewish sense and conducted their evangelism in the proselyte form of Jewish particularism (i.e., Gentiles could only be converted through Judaism). Two events altered this. First, the Hellenistic Jewish branch of the church rebelled against the Hebrew Christians, which resulted in the appointment of the seven deacons and a change in the orthodox policy of the Palestinian church. Second, this then led to a new preaching ministry, first by Stephen, whose insights ended in his martyrdom and the dispersal of the Hellenistic branch in chapter 8; then by Philip and others, who extended the gospel even further, to the Samaritans and God-fearers. As a further result, Peter and John came to Samaria (8:14), the next significant step toward the Gentile mission. Thus ended the centrality of Jerusalem in the unfolding story.<\/p>\n<p>The two miracles of Peter, at Lydda (the paralytic) and Joppa (raising the dead woman) in Acts 9:32-42, are probably intended to parallel similar miracles of Jesus in Luke’s first work (Lk 5:18-26; 8:49-56). This is part of a major theme in Acts whereby Jesus’ life and ministry are paralleled and continued in the work of the Spirit through the church. Again Peter is seen in a representative role.<\/p>\n<p>The new relationships are extended in two further scenes. First, Peter stays with “Simon, a tanner,” in Joppa, an unclean trade; no pious Jew would knowingly have social contact with such a one. Even more important, God teaches Peter through a dream (10:10-16) that the old dichotomy between clean and unclean has been broken. This then leads Peter to the home of an uncircumcised Gentile, the most serious social taboo for the Jew, and subsequent events force Peter to admit Gentiles into the church without the necessity of Jewish proselyte requirements. The serious consequences of this are seen in the debate that ensued in Jerusalem (Acts 11:2-3) and later at the council (Acts 15:1-21). The centrality of this event is demonstrated in the extent to which Luke reproduces Peter’s speech, which seems to be a repetition of chapter 10 but is meant to highlight this crucial episode. Often forgotten in the significance of this for the early church is the fact that for Luke the Gentile mission begins with Peter, not Paul. He is the one upon whom the salvific act of God descends; and as the leader of the church, he was the first important witness to it.<\/p>\n<p>The persecution of Herod Agrippa (Acts 12:1-4) was likely due to the furor caused by this free intercourse with Gentiles; and it ended the period of Peter’s leadership in Jerusalem. The Jewish people were greatly offended by the new Christian push; and according to Luke in Acts, the idyllic period of popularity, in which the common people supported the church, effectively ceased at this time. Peter’s miraculous release and the dramatic scene at Mary’s house typified the special place of Peter, but the momentum shifts. Peter is forced to flee Jerusalem, and in the interim James arises to leadership (Acts 12:17); at the Jerusalem council it is the latter who has the chair and presents the council’s decision (Acts 15:6-29).<\/p>\n<p>The exact relationship between Peter and the other disciples, especially with the so-called pillars—James and John—and the apostle Paul, cannot be ascertained. The evidence is too vague. Many have thought that indeed there were no truly universal leaders, for the early church was too diverse. However, that is unlikely, and Luke’s portrayal in Acts parallels Paul’s statement in Galatians 2:8 that Peter was the apostle par excellence to the “circumcised” and Paul to the “Gentiles.” They were the universal leaders, while James became the local leader of the Jerusalem eldership. However, neither Peter nor Paul had dominical status similar to that of later popes (i.e., neither was the absolute spokesman of the church and above criticism). So-called emissaries from James could have such an influence on Peter that he would hypocritically change his behavior before Gentiles (Gal 2:12), and Paul could rebuke Peter publicly for doing so (Gal 2:11-14). Paul never claimed authority over the other disciples and even sought their approval and “the right hands of fellowship” for his ministry to the Gentiles (Gal 2:1-10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersFutureMinistry\">Peter’s Future Ministry<\/p>\n<p>We have very little hard evidence for Peter’s other movements. It seems as though Peter gradually turned from leadership to missionary work. However, this is an oversimplification. It is most likely that, following the similar pattern of Paul, he combined the two. The presence of a “Cephas party” at Corinth (1 Cor 1:12; 3:22) may indicate that Peter had spent some time there. This is made even more likely when Paul uses Peter as the main example for taking one’s wife on missionary expeditions (1 Cor 9:5). The “Cephas party” probably consisted of those who were converted under his ministry; it is probable that they were Jewish Christians and opposed the “Paul party” on Jewish-Gentile debates reflected elsewhere in 1 Corinthians.<\/p>\n<p>The First Epistle of Peter was sent to churches in northern Asia Minor—the provinces of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia. The problem here is that there is no hint that Peter had been there and no personal notations in the epistle to demonstrate his acquaintance with these churches. However, it does show that he was very interested in them. In fact, some believe that the reason why Paul was not allowed into this district according to Acts 16:7-8 was that Peter was already ministering there. In short, the question of Peter’s involvement in Asia Minor must remain an open one.<\/p>\n<p>There is no final NT evidence that Peter went to Rome. First Peter 5:13 says that the epistle was sent from “Babylon,” and it is doubtful that this was the literal Babylon, because there is no tradition that Peter ever went there, and Babylon was sparsely populated back then. It is probably a cryptic symbol for Rome, the “Babylon of the West.” It is most likely that the “Babylon” of Revelation 14:8 and 16:19 is also a symbol of Rome. This would fit the strong tradition in the early church that indeed Peter did minister there.<\/p>\n<p>There are four early external witnesses concerning Peter’s death. John 21:18 mentions only the martyrdom of Peter but does not give any hint as to the place. First Clement was written at the end of the first century and reports the martyrdom of Peter and Paul among others. While 1 Clement 5:4 testifies only to the fact and not the place of Peter’s martyrdom, a study of two aspects favors Rome—the reference to a “great multitude” of martyrdoms, which best fits the Neronian persecution, and the phrase “glorious example among us,” which shows that the people of Clement’s own church (Rome) were involved. Ignatius’s letter to the Romans (4:3) also testifies generally to the martyrdom of Peter and Paul, and again the context favors Rome as the place. He says, “I did not command you as did Peter and Paul,” which shows that they had ministries in Rome. The Ascension of Isaiah 4:2-3, a Jewish Christian work of the same period, speaks of Beliar (probably Nero) who martyrs “one of the Twelve,” almost certainly Peter. Therefore the earliest evidence does not explicitly point to Rome as the place of Peter’s death, but that is the most likely hypothesis.<\/p>\n<p>Definite statements to that effect appear toward the end of the second century. Dionysius, bishop of Corinth, in a letter dated c. 170 (preserved in Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 2.25.8) says that Peter and Paul taught together in Italy. At the end of that century Irenaeus says (in <em>Against Heresies<\/em> 2.1-3) that Peter and Paul preached in Rome, and Tertullian in the same general period adds that Peter was martyred “like . . . the Lord” (<em>Scorpiace<\/em> 15). Clement of Alexandria and Origen both allude to Peter’s presence in Rome, and the latter adds the belief that he was “crucified head-downwards” (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 2.15.2; 3.1.2). The tradition that Peter was crucified may be supported in John 21:18: “when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall . . . carry thee wither thou wouldest not” (<span>kjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The fact that Paul’s Epistle to the Romans (c. 55–57) does not mention Peter tells us that he could not have gone there earlier than that. If 1 Peter was written during the Neronian persecution, as those who hold to Petrine authorship believe, he must have gone there sometime in the late 50s or early 60s. Of course, the extent of his ministry in Rome also cannot be known. Some indeed have posited that he had little or no extensive stay in Rome. The facts, as they can be recovered, point to certain tentative conclusions. Peter did have some type of ministry in Rome, though the extent of it cannot be known. However, it is doubtful, in light of the early testimony to his preaching ministry there, that he was merely passing through Rome when caught in Nero’s pogrom. Therefore he most likely spent the last years of his ministry in Rome and there suffered martyrdom under Nero, perhaps by crucifixion.<\/p>\n<p>Simon Peter, along with Paul, was the leading figure in the early church. His impact has been tragically dimmed by the acrimonious debates of Roman Catholic– Protestant circles, but the biblical evidence is clear. He was the leading disciple of Jesus and indeed the “rock” who provided the foundation for the church. As the representative disciple, his enthusiasm and even his weaknesses have made him the supreme example of the developing disciple, one who, through the power of the risen Lord, rose above his faults to become a towering figure on the church scene.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PETER, <span>The Apostle<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>One of the 12 disciples; rose to prominence both among the disciples during Jesus’ ministry and among the apostles afterwards.<\/p>\n<p>There are actually four forms of Peter’s name in the New Testament: the Hebrew translated into Greek, “Simeon” to “Simon,” and the Aramaic translated into Greek, “Cephas” to “Petros” (meaning “rock”). His given name was Simeon bar-Jonah (Mt 16:17; cf. Jn 1:42), “Simon the son of John,” which was common Semitic nomenclature. It is most likely that “Simon” was not merely the Greek equivalent of “Simeon” but that, having his home in bilingual Galilee, “Simon” was the alternate form he used in dealings with Gentiles. In fact, it was quite common for a cosmopolitan Jew to employ three forms of his name depending on the occasion: Aramaic, Latin, and Greek. The double name “Simon Peter” (or “Simon called Peter”) demonstrates that the second name was a later addition, similar to “Jesus, the Christ.” The number of times that the Aramaic equivalent “Cephas” is used (once in John, four times each in Galatians and 1 Corinthians), as well as its translation into the Greek (not common with proper names), indicates the importance of the secondary name. Both Aramaic and Greek forms mean “the rock,” an obvious indication of Peter’s stature in the early church (see below on Mt 16:18). It is obvious that he was called “Simon” throughout Jesus’ ministry but came to be known as “Peter” more and more in the apostolic age.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Background<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Conversion and Call<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Place among the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>• Peter the Rock<\/p>\n<p>• Peter the Apostle<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Future Ministry<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersBackground\">Peter’s Background<\/p>\n<p>Peter was raised in bilingual Galilee. John 1:44 says that the home of Andrew (his brother) and Peter was Bethsaida, the whereabouts of which is difficult to place archaeologically. The only site about which we know is east of the Jordan in the district called Gaulanitis. Yet John 12:21 places Bethsaida in Galilee; however, it is possible that John is reflecting the popular use of the term “Galilee” rather than the legally correct one. Peter and Andrew had a fishing business centered in Capernaum (Mk 1:21, 29) and perhaps were partners with James and John (Lk 5:10). It is also likely that they intermittently continued in their business while disciples, as indicated in the fishing scene in John 21:1-8.<\/p>\n<p>One difficulty with this is the series of statements saying, “We have left all and followed You” (Mt 19:27; Mk 10:28; Lk 18:28, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The majority of interpreters have given this an absolute sense of “sold” or “left” their business. However, Luke 18:28 occurs in the context of leaving their homes but obviously is not meant in an absolute sense. It seems most likely that the disciples did leave the practice of their fishing businesses to follow Christ, but kept the tools of their trade and returned to their trades when necessary.<\/p>\n<p>They certainly did not abandon their families, as evidenced by Peter, who returned to his home at the end of each tour. The New Testament tells us that Peter was married. In Mark 1:29-31 Jesus heals his mother-in-law, who perhaps was living with Peter. In fact, it is possible that his home became Jesus’ headquarters in Galilee. (Matthew 8:14 may indicate that Jesus dwelt there.) First Corinthians 9:5 says that Peter, along with the other married apostles, often took his wife with him on his missionary journeys. Later tradition speaks of his children (Clement of Alexandria’s <em>Stromateis<\/em> 2.6.52) and says that Peter was present at the martyrdom of his wife (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 3.30.2).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersConversionandCall\">Peter’s Conversion and Call<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s brother, Andrew, was a disciple of John the Baptist, according to John 1:35-40. This follows the witness of John in 1:29-34 and is the second stage of John’s discipleship drama in chapter one—i.e., after bearing witness he now sends his own followers to Jesus. Andrew and the unnamed disciple (perhaps Philip as in Jn 1:43 or the “beloved disciple,” whom many identify with John himself) then “follow” Jesus (a term used often in John for discipleship). The next day Andrew follows the Baptist’s example and finds his brother Simon, saying, “We have found the Messiah” (Jn 1:41, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Peter’s conversion is presupposed in John 1:42, where Simon is brought to Jesus by Andrew and there given a new name.<\/p>\n<p>There are three separate episodes in the Gospels in which Simon is called, and these overlap with three episodes in which he is given the name “Cephas” (“Peter,” which means “rock”) by Jesus. John locates the event in Judea where John the Baptist was baptizing. The synoptic Gospels have two different scenes. The first call takes place at the Sea of Galilee (Mk 1:16-20; Mt 4:18-22). Jesus is walking along the shore and sees Peter and Andrew along with James and John casting their nets into the sea. At this time he calls them to become “fishers of men.” Luke then expands this into a fishing scene (Lk 5:1-11), in which the disciples have fished all night and caught nothing but at the command of Jesus lower their nets and catch an amount of fish so great that the boat starts to sink. The episode concludes exactly like the Markan abbreviated form: Jesus says that from now on they will “catch men,” and as a result they leave everything and follow him.<\/p>\n<p>The second synoptic episode involving Peter’s call (and his new name) is the official choice of the Twelve upon the mountain (Mk 3:13-19 and parallels); in the list of the names we have “Simon he surnamed Peter.” The final occurrence dealing with Peter’s new name is found in Matthew 16:17-19, in connection with Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi.<\/p>\n<p>It is somewhat difficult to harmonize these episodes properly. Were there three different episodes in which Simon was called (Jn 1:42; Mk 1:20; 3:16) and three separate incidents in which he was given the name Cephas\/Peter (Jn 1:42; Mk 3:16; Mt 16:18)? It is attractive to a broad spectrum of academia to assume that one single event, which happened at some indeterminate time toward the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, was later expanded into these diverse traditions. However, a closer examination of the Gospel data does not necessitate such a conclusion. John 1:35-42 is not an institutional scene that connotes an official call. Rather, it describes the first encounter with Jesus and realization regarding his significance. The “renaming” is in the future tense and looks to a later event. Moreover, John deliberately omits most of the crisis events in Jesus’ life (the baptism, the choice of the Twelve, the Transfiguration, the words of institution at the Last Supper, Gethsemane) and replaces them with highly theological scenes that teach the spiritual significance of the events. This is what he has done here.<\/p>\n<p>The same is true of the first synoptic call, i.e., the fishing scene. Again, there is no hint of official ordination to office here but rather a proleptic or prophetic hint of future ministry. This is especially true of the highly theological scene in Luke, which promises abundant results. Again in all three accounts the future tense is employed: “I will make you fishers of men” (Matthew and Mark), “You will catch men” (Luke, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The call in Mark 1:20 and Matthew 4:21 and their reaction (leaving all behind and following Jesus) is the opening gambit that is finalized in the actual institutional scene in Mark 3:13-19 and parallels. The wording does not indicate that these two episodes are doublets, for the actual appointment of the disciples occurs in the second passage. We must differentiate between the original call to one segment (who became the so-called “inner circle” of the Twelve) and the final choice of all the disciples.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersPlaceamongtheTwelve\">Peter’s Place among the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>The prominence of Simon Peter in the Gospels and Acts cannot be disputed. While some have attempted to attribute this to his leadership role in the later church, there is no basis for that in the text of the NT. From the very beginning Simon attained preeminence above the others. In the lists of the Twelve just mentioned, Simon’s name always appears first, and in Matthew 10:2 it introduces his name as “the first.” Moreover, the Twelve are often designated “Peter and those with him” (Mk 1:36; Lk 9:32; 8:45, <span>nkjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Throughout the accounts Peter acted and spoke on behalf of the other disciples. At the Transfiguration it is Peter who wanted to erect tents (Mk 9:5), and he alone had sufficient faith to attempt walking on the water (Mt 14:28-31). It is Peter who asks the Lord to explain his teaching on forgiveness (Mt 18:21) and parables (Mt 15:15; Lk 12:41) and who speaks the disciples’ minds in Matthew 19:27, “Behold, we have left everything and followed you; what’s in it for us?” (paraphrased). The collectors of the temple tax come to Peter as leader of the group (Mt 17:24). As a member of the inner circle (with James and John, possibly Andrew in Mk 13:3) he was often alone with Jesus (at the raising of Jairus’s daughter, Mk 5:37 and parallels; at the Transfiguration, Mk 9:2 and parallels; at Gethsemane, Mk 14:33 and Mt 26:37). Jesus asks Peter and John to prepare the Passover meal in Luke 22:8, and in Mark 14:37 (and Mt 26:40) he directs his rebuke to Peter as representing the others (“Could ye not watch with me one hour?”). Finally, the message of the angel at the tomb as recorded in Mark 16:7 said, “Go your way, tell his disciples and Peter.” Certainly Peter held a very special place among the Twelve.<\/p>\n<p>This was especially evident in the Caesarea Philippi episode (Mk 8:27-33 and parallels). It was Peter whose confession became the high point of the Gospel accounts, “Thou art the Christ” (Luke adds “of God”; Matthew, “the Son of the living God”). After Jesus then spoke of the suffering of the Son of Man, Peter rebuked him, and in Mark’s description Jesus then turned, gazed at all the disciples, and said to Peter, “Get thee behind me, Satan: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but the things that be of men” (v 33, <span>kjv<\/span>). This was obviously directed at them all through Peter.<\/p>\n<p>The portrait of Peter that comes through all four accounts pictures him as impulsive, often rash; he is the first to act and speak his mind and was typified by his enthusiasm for everything in which he had a part. At the sight of Jesus walking on the water, Peter asked that the Lord command him to do the same and then immediately leaped out of the boat and began doing just that. At the Transfiguration, while the others were awed into silence by the appearance of Moses and Elijah, Peter the man of action said, “If thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles” (Mt 17:4, <span>kjv<\/span>). Mark and Luke both add here that Peter did not know what he was saying. Peter’s unguarded and unthinking tendency to protest Jesus’ statements is seen not only at Caesarea Philippi but also at the foot-washing scene in John 13:4-11 when he said first, “You shall never ever wash my feet”; and then after Jesus’ strong retort, “If I do not wash you, you have no part with Me,” he reversed himself completely, stating, “Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and head” (13:8-9, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Finally, in the account of the race to the tomb (Jn 20:2-10), the beloved disciple, reaching the tomb first, paused while Peter immediately and impulsively entered it. Peter was certainly one who “rushed in where angels fear to tread.” However, this very trait aligns him with all of us and may be one of the major reasons why he becomes the representative disciple throughout the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetertheRock\">Peter the Rock<\/p>\n<p>The key to the significance of Simon Peter is obviously the controversial addendum to the Caesarea Philippi episode, found only in Matthew 16:17-19, Jesus’ testimonial to Peter. There are several crucial aspects of this saying. The most important for this study is verse 18, “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church” (<span>kjv<\/span>). There have been many interpretations of this down through history: (1) It refers to Peter as the “rock” or first bishop of the church. This was the Roman Catholic interpretation from the third century on and was employed as a prooftext for apostolic succession, but it is not hinted at anywhere in the context or even in the epistles: it was not a first-century concept. (2) The majority of Protestants since the Reformation have taken this to be a reference to Peter’s statement of faith rather than to Peter himself; but this neglects the wordplay, which is even more pronounced in Aramaic, which has only one form for “Cephas” (rock). (3) An alternative has been to take “this rock” as a reference to Jesus himself, but that is fanciful and is hardly in the context. In conclusion, “this rock” is almost certainly a reference to Peter, but it must be understood in two ways. First, Peter was to become the foundation upon which Christ would build his church, a position clearly attested to in Acts. This does not mean that Peter had an authority above the other apostles. Paul’s rebuke of Peter in Galatians 2:11-14 demonstrates that he was not above them, and at the Jerusalem council in Acts 15 it is James who has the position of leadership. Second, Peter is seen here not merely as an individual but as the representative of the disciples. This view is coming to increasing prominence today. It recognized the Jewish concept of “corporate identity” in which the leader was identified with the corporate body (e.g., the king or high priest representing the nation before God). This concept is also in keeping with Matthew 18:18-20, which passes on the same authority to the church as is here given to Peter. In this view Peter as the rock becomes the first of the building blocks upon which Christ, the chief cornerstone (to continue the metaphor), will build his church (see Eph 2:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>Two other aspects are worthy of note here. First, verse 18 says, “the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” The “gates of hell” is a common Jewish euphemism for death’s inevitable and irrevocable power. Jesus is saying that Satan will not be triumphant over the church, and his sphere of operations, death, will be defeated (cf. 1 Cor 15:26, 54-55). The church would undergo persecution and martyrdom, but the church would be triumphant.<\/p>\n<p>Second, verse 19 promises, “I will give unto thee [singular] the keys of the kingdom,” another statement used of apostolic succession by the medieval church. Again, this must be understood in light of corporate identity; Peter, as the preeminent figure in the early church, here embodies the community in his leadership. The “keys of the kingdom” are in direct contrast to the “gates of hell” (cf. Rv 1:18, “the keys of hell and death” and Rv 3:7, the “key of David”), and this follows the imagery of the building seen in the rock upon which Christ will build his church. Here Peter is given the keys that will unlock the power of the kingdom in building God’s community, the church. The future tense (“will give”) undoubtedly points to the postresurrection period, when that power was unleashed and the church erected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetertheApostle\">Peter the Apostle<\/p>\n<p>Two events led to the new Peter who fills the pages of Acts: his reinstatement described in John 21:15-17 and the resurrection appearance of the Lord, which is never described but alluded to in Luke 24:34 and 1 Corinthians 15:5. His denial was certainly proof that he was not yet able to assume his predicted position as the rock of the church. Both Luke and Paul seem to state that the risen Lord appeared to Simon Peter before the others, which would be fitting in light of his preeminence in the early church. During the Palestinian era, the fifteen-year period prior to the Gentile mission, Peter was the leading figure. The others mentioned in Acts 1–12 are all secondary to Peter, the dominant director of church policy. These include John, who is with Peter in the temple (3:1), the prison (4:13), and Samaria (8:14); Stephen, who was one of the Seven and whose revolutionary preaching led to his martyrdom (chs 6–7); Philip, another of the Seven who proclaimed the gospel in Samaria and to the Ethiopian eunuch (ch 8); Barnabas, who set an example of communal sharing (4:36-37) and was an official delegate to Antioch (11:20-30); Paul, a miraculous convert and witness (9:1-30; 11:25-30; 12:25); and James, who became the first apostolic martyr (12:2). It is Peter who proposes the choice of the 12th disciple (1:15-17), who proclaims the gospel at Pentecost (2:14-40), who utters the healing word (3:6), and who defends the gospel before the Sanhedrin (4:8-12, 19-20; 5:29-32). The episode regarding Ananias and Sapphira is particularly poignant, for here Peter functions as the avenging messenger of God; nowhere is his authority more evident. We would also note his authority in the scene at Samaria concerning the attempt of Simon the Sorcerer to buy the charismatic power (8:18-24). Again, it is Peter whose influence commands the situation. In these two incidents we certainly see the “binding and loosing” jurisdiction (cf. Mt 16:19) exhibited in Peter.<\/p>\n<p>Yet Peter and the church still came under the strictures of their Jewish heritage. The evidence points to a Jewish proselyte self-consciousness on the part of the early church. They viewed themselves as the righteous remnant, living in the age of Messianic fulfillment, but still interpreted themselves in a Jewish sense and conducted their evangelism in the proselyte form of Jewish particularism (i.e., Gentiles could only be converted through Judaism). Two events altered this. First, the Hellenistic Jewish branch of the church rebelled against the Hebrew Christians, which resulted in the appointment of the seven deacons and a change in the orthodox policy of the Palestinian church. Second, this then led to a new preaching ministry, first by Stephen, whose insights ended in his martyrdom and the dispersal of the Hellenistic branch in chapter 8; then by Philip and others, who extended the gospel even further, to the Samaritans and God-fearers. As a further result, Peter and John came to Samaria (8:14), the next significant step toward the Gentile mission. Thus ended the centrality of Jerusalem in the unfolding story.<\/p>\n<p>The two miracles of Peter, at Lydda (the paralytic) and Joppa (raising the dead woman) in Acts 9:32-42, are probably intended to parallel similar miracles of Jesus in Luke’s first work (Lk 5:18-26; 8:49-56). This is part of a major theme in Acts whereby Jesus’ life and ministry are paralleled and continued in the work of the Spirit through the church. Again Peter is seen in a representative role.<\/p>\n<p>The new relationships are extended in two further scenes. First, Peter stays with “Simon, a tanner,” in Joppa, an unclean trade; no pious Jew would knowingly have social contact with such a one. Even more important, God teaches Peter through a dream (10:10-16) that the old dichotomy between clean and unclean has been broken. This then leads Peter to the home of an uncircumcised Gentile, the most serious social taboo for the Jew, and subsequent events force Peter to admit Gentiles into the church without the necessity of Jewish proselyte requirements. The serious consequences of this are seen in the debate that ensued in Jerusalem (Acts 11:2-3) and later at the council (Acts 15:1-21). The centrality of this event is demonstrated in the extent to which Luke reproduces Peter’s speech, which seems to be a repetition of chapter 10 but is meant to highlight this crucial episode. Often forgotten in the significance of this for the early church is the fact that for Luke the Gentile mission begins with Peter, not Paul. He is the one upon whom the salvific act of God descends; and as the leader of the church, he was the first important witness to it.<\/p>\n<p>The persecution of Herod Agrippa (Acts 12:1-4) was likely due to the furor caused by this free intercourse with Gentiles; and it ended the period of Peter’s leadership in Jerusalem. The Jewish people were greatly offended by the new Christian push; and according to Luke in Acts, the idyllic period of popularity, in which the common people supported the church, effectively ceased at this time. Peter’s miraculous release and the dramatic scene at Mary’s house typified the special place of Peter, but the momentum shifts. Peter is forced to flee Jerusalem, and in the interim James arises to leadership (Acts 12:17); at the Jerusalem council it is the latter who has the chair and presents the council’s decision (Acts 15:6-29).<\/p>\n<p>The exact relationship between Peter and the other disciples, especially with the so-called pillars—James and John—and the apostle Paul, cannot be ascertained. The evidence is too vague. Many have thought that indeed there were no truly universal leaders, for the early church was too diverse. However, that is unlikely, and Luke’s portrayal in Acts parallels Paul’s statement in Galatians 2:8 that Peter was the apostle par excellence to the “circumcised” and Paul to the “Gentiles.” They were the universal leaders, while James became the local leader of the Jerusalem eldership. However, neither Peter nor Paul had dominical status similar to that of later popes (i.e., neither was the absolute spokesman of the church and above criticism). So-called emissaries from James could have such an influence on Peter that he would hypocritically change his behavior before Gentiles (Gal 2:12), and Paul could rebuke Peter publicly for doing so (Gal 2:11-14). Paul never claimed authority over the other disciples and even sought their approval and “the right hands of fellowship” for his ministry to the Gentiles (Gal 2:1-10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersFutureMinistry\">Peter’s Future Ministry<\/p>\n<p>We have very little hard evidence for Peter’s other movements. It seems as though Peter gradually turned from leadership to missionary work. However, this is an oversimplification. It is most likely that, following the similar pattern of Paul, he combined the two. The presence of a “Cephas party” at Corinth (1 Cor 1:12; 3:22) may indicate that Peter had spent some time there. This is made even more likely when Paul uses Peter as the main example for taking one’s wife on missionary expeditions (1 Cor 9:5). The “Cephas party” probably consisted of those who were converted under his ministry; it is probable that they were Jewish Christians and opposed the “Paul party” on Jewish-Gentile debates reflected elsewhere in 1 Corinthians.<\/p>\n<p>The First Epistle of Peter was sent to churches in northern Asia Minor—the provinces of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia. The problem here is that there is no hint that Peter had been there and no personal notations in the epistle to demonstrate his acquaintance with these churches. However, it does show that he was very interested in them. In fact, some believe that the reason why Paul was not allowed into this district according to Acts 16:7-8 was that Peter was already ministering there. In short, the question of Peter’s involvement in Asia Minor must remain an open one.<\/p>\n<p>There is no final NT evidence that Peter went to Rome. First Peter 5:13 says that the epistle was sent from “Babylon,” and it is doubtful that this was the literal Babylon, because there is no tradition that Peter ever went there, and Babylon was sparsely populated back then. It is probably a cryptic symbol for Rome, the “Babylon of the West.” It is most likely that the “Babylon” of Revelation 14:8 and 16:19 is also a symbol of Rome. This would fit the strong tradition in the early church that indeed Peter did minister there.<\/p>\n<p>There are four early external witnesses concerning Peter’s death. John 21:18 mentions only the martyrdom of Peter but does not give any hint as to the place. First Clement was written at the end of the first century and reports the martyrdom of Peter and Paul among others. While 1 Clement 5:4 testifies only to the fact and not the place of Peter’s martyrdom, a study of two aspects favors Rome—the reference to a “great multitude” of martyrdoms, which best fits the Neronian persecution, and the phrase “glorious example among us,” which shows that the people of Clement’s own church (Rome) were involved. Ignatius’s letter to the Romans (4:3) also testifies generally to the martyrdom of Peter and Paul, and again the context favors Rome as the place. He says, “I did not command you as did Peter and Paul,” which shows that they had ministries in Rome. The Ascension of Isaiah 4:2-3, a Jewish Christian work of the same period, speaks of Beliar (probably Nero) who martyrs “one of the Twelve,” almost certainly Peter. Therefore the earliest evidence does not explicitly point to Rome as the place of Peter’s death, but that is the most likely hypothesis.<\/p>\n<p>Definite statements to that effect appear toward the end of the second century. Dionysius, bishop of Corinth, in a letter dated c. 170 (preserved in Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 2.25.8) says that Peter and Paul taught together in Italy. At the end of that century Irenaeus says (in <em>Against Heresies<\/em> 2.1-3) that Peter and Paul preached in Rome, and Tertullian in the same general period adds that Peter was martyred “like . . . the Lord” (<em>Scorpiace<\/em> 15). Clement of Alexandria and Origen both allude to Peter’s presence in Rome, and the latter adds the belief that he was “crucified head-downwards” (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 2.15.2; 3.1.2). The tradition that Peter was crucified may be supported in John 21:18: “when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall . . . carry thee wither thou wouldest not” (<span>kjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The fact that Paul’s Epistle to the Romans (c. 55–57) does not mention Peter tells us that he could not have gone there earlier than that. If 1 Peter was written during the Neronian persecution, as those who hold to Petrine authorship believe, he must have gone there sometime in the late 50s or early 60s. Of course, the extent of his ministry in Rome also cannot be known. Some indeed have posited that he had little or no extensive stay in Rome. The facts, as they can be recovered, point to certain tentative conclusions. Peter did have some type of ministry in Rome, though the extent of it cannot be known. However, it is doubtful, in light of the early testimony to his preaching ministry there, that he was merely passing through Rome when caught in Nero’s pogrom. Therefore he most likely spent the last years of his ministry in Rome and there suffered martyrdom under Nero, perhaps by crucifixion.<\/p>\n<p>Simon Peter, along with Paul, was the leading figure in the early church. His impact has been tragically dimmed by the acrimonious debates of Roman Catholic– Protestant circles, but the biblical evidence is clear. He was the leading disciple of Jesus and indeed the “rock” who provided the foundation for the church. As the representative disciple, his enthusiasm and even his weaknesses have made him the supreme example of the developing disciple, one who, through the power of the risen Lord, rose above his faults to become a towering figure on the church scene.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PETER, The Apostle One of the 12 disciples; rose to prominence both among the disciples during Jesus’ ministry and among the apostles afterwards. There are actually four forms of Peter’s name in the New Testament: the Hebrew translated into Greek, “Simeon” to “Simon,” and the Aramaic translated into Greek, “Cephas” to “Petros” (meaning “rock”). His given name was Simeon bar-Jonah (Mt 16:17; cf. Jn 1:42), “Simon the son of John,” which was common Semitic nomenclature. It is most likely that “S...","summary_en":"PETER, The Apostle One of the 12 disciples; rose to prominence both among the disciples during Jesus’ ministry and among the apostles afterwards. There are actually four forms of Peter’s name in the New Testament: the Hebrew translated into Greek, “Simeon” to “Simon,” and the Aramaic translated into Greek, “Cephas” to “Petros” (meaning “rock”). His given name was Simeon bar-Jonah (Mt 16:17; cf. Jn 1:42), “Simon the son of John,” which was common Semitic nomenclature. It is most likely that “S...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":35435,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Simon","title_en":"Simon","content_ro":"<h3>SIMON<\/h3>\n<p>Greek form of a Hebrew\/Aramaic name meaning “God has heard.” Nine men in the NT had this name:<\/p>\n<p>1. Son of Jona (Mt 16:17) or John (Jn 1:42), Andrew’s brother (v 40), and surnamed Cephas and Peter (respectively Aramaic and Greek, for “rock,” v 42) by Jesus. A fisherman of Bethsaida (Mk 1:16; Jn 1:44), he became an apostle of Jesus and author of two NT letters bearing his name. <em>See<\/em> Peter, The Apostle.<\/p>\n<li>2. Brother of Jesus, named with other brothers, James, Joses or Joseph, and Judas (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3).<\/li>\n<li>3. Leper, perhaps cured by Jesus, in whose house at Bethany Jesus and his disciples were eating when a woman poured an alabaster flask of costly ointment on the Lord’s head. Over the disciples’ objections against the waste of what could have been sold to support the poor, Jesus commended the act as a wonderful thing (Mt 26:6-13; Mk 14:3-9). From John 12:1-8 it appears that Simon’s house was also the house of Mary, Martha, and Lazarus, but their relationship to Simon is uncertain.<\/li>\n<li>4. Man of Cyrene, a district of North Africa, whom the Romans forced to carry Jesus’ cross (Mt 27:32; Mk 15:21; Lk 23:26). He was the father of Alexander and Rufus (Mk 15:21; cf. Rom 16:13).<\/li>\n<li>5. Apostle of Jesus called a Zealot (Lk 6:15), presumably because of prior association either with the party of political extremists by that name, who adopted terrorism to oppose the Roman occupation of Palestine, or with one of a number of Jewish groups noted for their zeal for the law. In Matthew 10:4 and Mark 3:18 he is designated the “Cananaean” (<span>rsv<\/span>)—from the Aramaic word for “zealot.” He is mentioned again in Acts 1:13 as one of the 11 apostles in Jerusalem after Jesus’ ascension. Otherwise, the NT is silent about him.<\/li>\n<li>6. Pharisee whose treatment of Jesus evoked the parable of the two debtors (Lk 7:36-50). He invited Jesus to eat at his house but withheld courtesies customary for guests and disapproved of Jesus’ acceptance of a “sinner” woman who wet the Lord’s feet with her tears, dried them with her hair, and anointed them with ointment from an alabaster flask. Jesus’ parable contrasted the woman’s act of loving and repentant faith with Simon’s unloving and self-righteous skepticism.<\/li>\n<li>7. Father of Judas Iscariot, the disciple who betrayed Jesus in Gethsemane (Jn 6:71; 13:2, 26).<\/li>\n<li>8. Magician (often called Simon Magus) of great repute in Samaria. Impressed by the signs and miracles performed by Philip the deacon-become-evangelist, he joined the crowd of baptized believers. He offered Peter and John money in exchange for the gift of the Holy Spirit, provoking Peter’s emphatic rebuke (Acts 8:9-24). From the association of this incident with his name, the English word “simony” is derived; it denotes the sale or purchase of church positions, or any profiteering from sacred things.<\/li>\n<li>9. Tanner of Joppa. Peter lodged at his house for many days (Acts 9:43; 10:6, 17, 32). On Simon’s housetop, Peter experienced the vision of a great sheet let down from heaven, containing animals and birds prohibited as food in Jewish law (10:15). Peter later recognized this vision as his preparation for consenting to preach the gospel to the Gentiles (vv 28-29).<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>SIMON<\/h3>\n<p>Greek form of a Hebrew\/Aramaic name meaning “God has heard.” Nine men in the NT had this name:<\/p>\n<p>1. Son of Jona (Mt 16:17) or John (Jn 1:42), Andrew’s brother (v 40), and surnamed Cephas and Peter (respectively Aramaic and Greek, for “rock,” v 42) by Jesus. A fisherman of Bethsaida (Mk 1:16; Jn 1:44), he became an apostle of Jesus and author of two NT letters bearing his name. <em>See<\/em> Peter, The Apostle.<\/p>\n<li>2. Brother of Jesus, named with other brothers, James, Joses or Joseph, and Judas (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3).<\/li>\n<li>3. Leper, perhaps cured by Jesus, in whose house at Bethany Jesus and his disciples were eating when a woman poured an alabaster flask of costly ointment on the Lord’s head. Over the disciples’ objections against the waste of what could have been sold to support the poor, Jesus commended the act as a wonderful thing (Mt 26:6-13; Mk 14:3-9). From John 12:1-8 it appears that Simon’s house was also the house of Mary, Martha, and Lazarus, but their relationship to Simon is uncertain.<\/li>\n<li>4. Man of Cyrene, a district of North Africa, whom the Romans forced to carry Jesus’ cross (Mt 27:32; Mk 15:21; Lk 23:26). He was the father of Alexander and Rufus (Mk 15:21; cf. Rom 16:13).<\/li>\n<li>5. Apostle of Jesus called a Zealot (Lk 6:15), presumably because of prior association either with the party of political extremists by that name, who adopted terrorism to oppose the Roman occupation of Palestine, or with one of a number of Jewish groups noted for their zeal for the law. In Matthew 10:4 and Mark 3:18 he is designated the “Cananaean” (<span>rsv<\/span>)—from the Aramaic word for “zealot.” He is mentioned again in Acts 1:13 as one of the 11 apostles in Jerusalem after Jesus’ ascension. Otherwise, the NT is silent about him.<\/li>\n<li>6. Pharisee whose treatment of Jesus evoked the parable of the two debtors (Lk 7:36-50). He invited Jesus to eat at his house but withheld courtesies customary for guests and disapproved of Jesus’ acceptance of a “sinner” woman who wet the Lord’s feet with her tears, dried them with her hair, and anointed them with ointment from an alabaster flask. Jesus’ parable contrasted the woman’s act of loving and repentant faith with Simon’s unloving and self-righteous skepticism.<\/li>\n<li>7. Father of Judas Iscariot, the disciple who betrayed Jesus in Gethsemane (Jn 6:71; 13:2, 26).<\/li>\n<li>8. Magician (often called Simon Magus) of great repute in Samaria. Impressed by the signs and miracles performed by Philip the deacon-become-evangelist, he joined the crowd of baptized believers. He offered Peter and John money in exchange for the gift of the Holy Spirit, provoking Peter’s emphatic rebuke (Acts 8:9-24). From the association of this incident with his name, the English word “simony” is derived; it denotes the sale or purchase of church positions, or any profiteering from sacred things.<\/li>\n<li>9. Tanner of Joppa. Peter lodged at his house for many days (Acts 9:43; 10:6, 17, 32). On Simon’s housetop, Peter experienced the vision of a great sheet let down from heaven, containing animals and birds prohibited as food in Jewish law (10:15). Peter later recognized this vision as his preparation for consenting to preach the gospel to the Gentiles (vv 28-29).<\/li>","summary_ro":"SIMON Greek form of a Hebrew\/Aramaic name meaning “God has heard.” Nine men in the NT had this name: 1. Son of Jona (Mt 16:17) or John (Jn 1:42), Andrew’s brother (v 40), and surnamed Cephas and Peter (respectively Aramaic and Greek, for “rock,” v 42) by Jesus. A fisherman of Bethsaida (Mk 1:16; Jn 1:44), he became an apostle of Jesus and author of two NT letters bearing his name. See Peter, The Apostle. 2. Brother of Jesus, named with other brothers, James, Joses or Joseph, and Judas (Mt 13:...","summary_en":"SIMON Greek form of a Hebrew\/Aramaic name meaning “God has heard.” Nine men in the NT had this name: 1. Son of Jona (Mt 16:17) or John (Jn 1:42), Andrew’s brother (v 40), and surnamed Cephas and Peter (respectively Aramaic and Greek, for “rock,” v 42) by Jesus. A fisherman of Bethsaida (Mk 1:16; Jn 1:44), he became an apostle of Jesus and author of two NT letters bearing his name. See Peter, The Apostle. 2. Brother of Jesus, named with other brothers, James, Joses or Joseph, and Judas (Mt 13:...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"43":[{"id":30015,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Peter, the Apostle","title_en":"Peter, the Apostle","content_ro":"<h3>PETER, <span>The Apostle<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>One of the 12 disciples; rose to prominence both among the disciples during Jesus’ ministry and among the apostles afterwards.<\/p>\n<p>There are actually four forms of Peter’s name in the New Testament: the Hebrew translated into Greek, “Simeon” to “Simon,” and the Aramaic translated into Greek, “Cephas” to “Petros” (meaning “rock”). His given name was Simeon bar-Jonah (Mt 16:17; cf. Jn 1:42), “Simon the son of John,” which was common Semitic nomenclature. It is most likely that “Simon” was not merely the Greek equivalent of “Simeon” but that, having his home in bilingual Galilee, “Simon” was the alternate form he used in dealings with Gentiles. In fact, it was quite common for a cosmopolitan Jew to employ three forms of his name depending on the occasion: Aramaic, Latin, and Greek. The double name “Simon Peter” (or “Simon called Peter”) demonstrates that the second name was a later addition, similar to “Jesus, the Christ.” The number of times that the Aramaic equivalent “Cephas” is used (once in John, four times each in Galatians and 1 Corinthians), as well as its translation into the Greek (not common with proper names), indicates the importance of the secondary name. Both Aramaic and Greek forms mean “the rock,” an obvious indication of Peter’s stature in the early church (see below on Mt 16:18). It is obvious that he was called “Simon” throughout Jesus’ ministry but came to be known as “Peter” more and more in the apostolic age.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Background<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Conversion and Call<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Place among the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>• Peter the Rock<\/p>\n<p>• Peter the Apostle<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Future Ministry<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersBackground\">Peter’s Background<\/p>\n<p>Peter was raised in bilingual Galilee. John 1:44 says that the home of Andrew (his brother) and Peter was Bethsaida, the whereabouts of which is difficult to place archaeologically. The only site about which we know is east of the Jordan in the district called Gaulanitis. Yet John 12:21 places Bethsaida in Galilee; however, it is possible that John is reflecting the popular use of the term “Galilee” rather than the legally correct one. Peter and Andrew had a fishing business centered in Capernaum (Mk 1:21, 29) and perhaps were partners with James and John (Lk 5:10). It is also likely that they intermittently continued in their business while disciples, as indicated in the fishing scene in John 21:1-8.<\/p>\n<p>One difficulty with this is the series of statements saying, “We have left all and followed You” (Mt 19:27; Mk 10:28; Lk 18:28, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The majority of interpreters have given this an absolute sense of “sold” or “left” their business. However, Luke 18:28 occurs in the context of leaving their homes but obviously is not meant in an absolute sense. It seems most likely that the disciples did leave the practice of their fishing businesses to follow Christ, but kept the tools of their trade and returned to their trades when necessary.<\/p>\n<p>They certainly did not abandon their families, as evidenced by Peter, who returned to his home at the end of each tour. The New Testament tells us that Peter was married. In Mark 1:29-31 Jesus heals his mother-in-law, who perhaps was living with Peter. In fact, it is possible that his home became Jesus’ headquarters in Galilee. (Matthew 8:14 may indicate that Jesus dwelt there.) First Corinthians 9:5 says that Peter, along with the other married apostles, often took his wife with him on his missionary journeys. Later tradition speaks of his children (Clement of Alexandria’s <em>Stromateis<\/em> 2.6.52) and says that Peter was present at the martyrdom of his wife (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 3.30.2).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersConversionandCall\">Peter’s Conversion and Call<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s brother, Andrew, was a disciple of John the Baptist, according to John 1:35-40. This follows the witness of John in 1:29-34 and is the second stage of John’s discipleship drama in chapter one—i.e., after bearing witness he now sends his own followers to Jesus. Andrew and the unnamed disciple (perhaps Philip as in Jn 1:43 or the “beloved disciple,” whom many identify with John himself) then “follow” Jesus (a term used often in John for discipleship). The next day Andrew follows the Baptist’s example and finds his brother Simon, saying, “We have found the Messiah” (Jn 1:41, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Peter’s conversion is presupposed in John 1:42, where Simon is brought to Jesus by Andrew and there given a new name.<\/p>\n<p>There are three separate episodes in the Gospels in which Simon is called, and these overlap with three episodes in which he is given the name “Cephas” (“Peter,” which means “rock”) by Jesus. John locates the event in Judea where John the Baptist was baptizing. The synoptic Gospels have two different scenes. The first call takes place at the Sea of Galilee (Mk 1:16-20; Mt 4:18-22). Jesus is walking along the shore and sees Peter and Andrew along with James and John casting their nets into the sea. At this time he calls them to become “fishers of men.” Luke then expands this into a fishing scene (Lk 5:1-11), in which the disciples have fished all night and caught nothing but at the command of Jesus lower their nets and catch an amount of fish so great that the boat starts to sink. The episode concludes exactly like the Markan abbreviated form: Jesus says that from now on they will “catch men,” and as a result they leave everything and follow him.<\/p>\n<p>The second synoptic episode involving Peter’s call (and his new name) is the official choice of the Twelve upon the mountain (Mk 3:13-19 and parallels); in the list of the names we have “Simon he surnamed Peter.” The final occurrence dealing with Peter’s new name is found in Matthew 16:17-19, in connection with Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi.<\/p>\n<p>It is somewhat difficult to harmonize these episodes properly. Were there three different episodes in which Simon was called (Jn 1:42; Mk 1:20; 3:16) and three separate incidents in which he was given the name Cephas\/Peter (Jn 1:42; Mk 3:16; Mt 16:18)? It is attractive to a broad spectrum of academia to assume that one single event, which happened at some indeterminate time toward the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, was later expanded into these diverse traditions. However, a closer examination of the Gospel data does not necessitate such a conclusion. John 1:35-42 is not an institutional scene that connotes an official call. Rather, it describes the first encounter with Jesus and realization regarding his significance. The “renaming” is in the future tense and looks to a later event. Moreover, John deliberately omits most of the crisis events in Jesus’ life (the baptism, the choice of the Twelve, the Transfiguration, the words of institution at the Last Supper, Gethsemane) and replaces them with highly theological scenes that teach the spiritual significance of the events. This is what he has done here.<\/p>\n<p>The same is true of the first synoptic call, i.e., the fishing scene. Again, there is no hint of official ordination to office here but rather a proleptic or prophetic hint of future ministry. This is especially true of the highly theological scene in Luke, which promises abundant results. Again in all three accounts the future tense is employed: “I will make you fishers of men” (Matthew and Mark), “You will catch men” (Luke, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The call in Mark 1:20 and Matthew 4:21 and their reaction (leaving all behind and following Jesus) is the opening gambit that is finalized in the actual institutional scene in Mark 3:13-19 and parallels. The wording does not indicate that these two episodes are doublets, for the actual appointment of the disciples occurs in the second passage. We must differentiate between the original call to one segment (who became the so-called “inner circle” of the Twelve) and the final choice of all the disciples.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersPlaceamongtheTwelve\">Peter’s Place among the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>The prominence of Simon Peter in the Gospels and Acts cannot be disputed. While some have attempted to attribute this to his leadership role in the later church, there is no basis for that in the text of the NT. From the very beginning Simon attained preeminence above the others. In the lists of the Twelve just mentioned, Simon’s name always appears first, and in Matthew 10:2 it introduces his name as “the first.” Moreover, the Twelve are often designated “Peter and those with him” (Mk 1:36; Lk 9:32; 8:45, <span>nkjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Throughout the accounts Peter acted and spoke on behalf of the other disciples. At the Transfiguration it is Peter who wanted to erect tents (Mk 9:5), and he alone had sufficient faith to attempt walking on the water (Mt 14:28-31). It is Peter who asks the Lord to explain his teaching on forgiveness (Mt 18:21) and parables (Mt 15:15; Lk 12:41) and who speaks the disciples’ minds in Matthew 19:27, “Behold, we have left everything and followed you; what’s in it for us?” (paraphrased). The collectors of the temple tax come to Peter as leader of the group (Mt 17:24). As a member of the inner circle (with James and John, possibly Andrew in Mk 13:3) he was often alone with Jesus (at the raising of Jairus’s daughter, Mk 5:37 and parallels; at the Transfiguration, Mk 9:2 and parallels; at Gethsemane, Mk 14:33 and Mt 26:37). Jesus asks Peter and John to prepare the Passover meal in Luke 22:8, and in Mark 14:37 (and Mt 26:40) he directs his rebuke to Peter as representing the others (“Could ye not watch with me one hour?”). Finally, the message of the angel at the tomb as recorded in Mark 16:7 said, “Go your way, tell his disciples and Peter.” Certainly Peter held a very special place among the Twelve.<\/p>\n<p>This was especially evident in the Caesarea Philippi episode (Mk 8:27-33 and parallels). It was Peter whose confession became the high point of the Gospel accounts, “Thou art the Christ” (Luke adds “of God”; Matthew, “the Son of the living God”). After Jesus then spoke of the suffering of the Son of Man, Peter rebuked him, and in Mark’s description Jesus then turned, gazed at all the disciples, and said to Peter, “Get thee behind me, Satan: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but the things that be of men” (v 33, <span>kjv<\/span>). This was obviously directed at them all through Peter.<\/p>\n<p>The portrait of Peter that comes through all four accounts pictures him as impulsive, often rash; he is the first to act and speak his mind and was typified by his enthusiasm for everything in which he had a part. At the sight of Jesus walking on the water, Peter asked that the Lord command him to do the same and then immediately leaped out of the boat and began doing just that. At the Transfiguration, while the others were awed into silence by the appearance of Moses and Elijah, Peter the man of action said, “If thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles” (Mt 17:4, <span>kjv<\/span>). Mark and Luke both add here that Peter did not know what he was saying. Peter’s unguarded and unthinking tendency to protest Jesus’ statements is seen not only at Caesarea Philippi but also at the foot-washing scene in John 13:4-11 when he said first, “You shall never ever wash my feet”; and then after Jesus’ strong retort, “If I do not wash you, you have no part with Me,” he reversed himself completely, stating, “Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and head” (13:8-9, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Finally, in the account of the race to the tomb (Jn 20:2-10), the beloved disciple, reaching the tomb first, paused while Peter immediately and impulsively entered it. Peter was certainly one who “rushed in where angels fear to tread.” However, this very trait aligns him with all of us and may be one of the major reasons why he becomes the representative disciple throughout the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetertheRock\">Peter the Rock<\/p>\n<p>The key to the significance of Simon Peter is obviously the controversial addendum to the Caesarea Philippi episode, found only in Matthew 16:17-19, Jesus’ testimonial to Peter. There are several crucial aspects of this saying. The most important for this study is verse 18, “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church” (<span>kjv<\/span>). There have been many interpretations of this down through history: (1) It refers to Peter as the “rock” or first bishop of the church. This was the Roman Catholic interpretation from the third century on and was employed as a prooftext for apostolic succession, but it is not hinted at anywhere in the context or even in the epistles: it was not a first-century concept. (2) The majority of Protestants since the Reformation have taken this to be a reference to Peter’s statement of faith rather than to Peter himself; but this neglects the wordplay, which is even more pronounced in Aramaic, which has only one form for “Cephas” (rock). (3) An alternative has been to take “this rock” as a reference to Jesus himself, but that is fanciful and is hardly in the context. In conclusion, “this rock” is almost certainly a reference to Peter, but it must be understood in two ways. First, Peter was to become the foundation upon which Christ would build his church, a position clearly attested to in Acts. This does not mean that Peter had an authority above the other apostles. Paul’s rebuke of Peter in Galatians 2:11-14 demonstrates that he was not above them, and at the Jerusalem council in Acts 15 it is James who has the position of leadership. Second, Peter is seen here not merely as an individual but as the representative of the disciples. This view is coming to increasing prominence today. It recognized the Jewish concept of “corporate identity” in which the leader was identified with the corporate body (e.g., the king or high priest representing the nation before God). This concept is also in keeping with Matthew 18:18-20, which passes on the same authority to the church as is here given to Peter. In this view Peter as the rock becomes the first of the building blocks upon which Christ, the chief cornerstone (to continue the metaphor), will build his church (see Eph 2:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>Two other aspects are worthy of note here. First, verse 18 says, “the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” The “gates of hell” is a common Jewish euphemism for death’s inevitable and irrevocable power. Jesus is saying that Satan will not be triumphant over the church, and his sphere of operations, death, will be defeated (cf. 1 Cor 15:26, 54-55). The church would undergo persecution and martyrdom, but the church would be triumphant.<\/p>\n<p>Second, verse 19 promises, “I will give unto thee [singular] the keys of the kingdom,” another statement used of apostolic succession by the medieval church. Again, this must be understood in light of corporate identity; Peter, as the preeminent figure in the early church, here embodies the community in his leadership. The “keys of the kingdom” are in direct contrast to the “gates of hell” (cf. Rv 1:18, “the keys of hell and death” and Rv 3:7, the “key of David”), and this follows the imagery of the building seen in the rock upon which Christ will build his church. Here Peter is given the keys that will unlock the power of the kingdom in building God’s community, the church. The future tense (“will give”) undoubtedly points to the postresurrection period, when that power was unleashed and the church erected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetertheApostle\">Peter the Apostle<\/p>\n<p>Two events led to the new Peter who fills the pages of Acts: his reinstatement described in John 21:15-17 and the resurrection appearance of the Lord, which is never described but alluded to in Luke 24:34 and 1 Corinthians 15:5. His denial was certainly proof that he was not yet able to assume his predicted position as the rock of the church. Both Luke and Paul seem to state that the risen Lord appeared to Simon Peter before the others, which would be fitting in light of his preeminence in the early church. During the Palestinian era, the fifteen-year period prior to the Gentile mission, Peter was the leading figure. The others mentioned in Acts 1–12 are all secondary to Peter, the dominant director of church policy. These include John, who is with Peter in the temple (3:1), the prison (4:13), and Samaria (8:14); Stephen, who was one of the Seven and whose revolutionary preaching led to his martyrdom (chs 6–7); Philip, another of the Seven who proclaimed the gospel in Samaria and to the Ethiopian eunuch (ch 8); Barnabas, who set an example of communal sharing (4:36-37) and was an official delegate to Antioch (11:20-30); Paul, a miraculous convert and witness (9:1-30; 11:25-30; 12:25); and James, who became the first apostolic martyr (12:2). It is Peter who proposes the choice of the 12th disciple (1:15-17), who proclaims the gospel at Pentecost (2:14-40), who utters the healing word (3:6), and who defends the gospel before the Sanhedrin (4:8-12, 19-20; 5:29-32). The episode regarding Ananias and Sapphira is particularly poignant, for here Peter functions as the avenging messenger of God; nowhere is his authority more evident. We would also note his authority in the scene at Samaria concerning the attempt of Simon the Sorcerer to buy the charismatic power (8:18-24). Again, it is Peter whose influence commands the situation. In these two incidents we certainly see the “binding and loosing” jurisdiction (cf. Mt 16:19) exhibited in Peter.<\/p>\n<p>Yet Peter and the church still came under the strictures of their Jewish heritage. The evidence points to a Jewish proselyte self-consciousness on the part of the early church. They viewed themselves as the righteous remnant, living in the age of Messianic fulfillment, but still interpreted themselves in a Jewish sense and conducted their evangelism in the proselyte form of Jewish particularism (i.e., Gentiles could only be converted through Judaism). Two events altered this. First, the Hellenistic Jewish branch of the church rebelled against the Hebrew Christians, which resulted in the appointment of the seven deacons and a change in the orthodox policy of the Palestinian church. Second, this then led to a new preaching ministry, first by Stephen, whose insights ended in his martyrdom and the dispersal of the Hellenistic branch in chapter 8; then by Philip and others, who extended the gospel even further, to the Samaritans and God-fearers. As a further result, Peter and John came to Samaria (8:14), the next significant step toward the Gentile mission. Thus ended the centrality of Jerusalem in the unfolding story.<\/p>\n<p>The two miracles of Peter, at Lydda (the paralytic) and Joppa (raising the dead woman) in Acts 9:32-42, are probably intended to parallel similar miracles of Jesus in Luke’s first work (Lk 5:18-26; 8:49-56). This is part of a major theme in Acts whereby Jesus’ life and ministry are paralleled and continued in the work of the Spirit through the church. Again Peter is seen in a representative role.<\/p>\n<p>The new relationships are extended in two further scenes. First, Peter stays with “Simon, a tanner,” in Joppa, an unclean trade; no pious Jew would knowingly have social contact with such a one. Even more important, God teaches Peter through a dream (10:10-16) that the old dichotomy between clean and unclean has been broken. This then leads Peter to the home of an uncircumcised Gentile, the most serious social taboo for the Jew, and subsequent events force Peter to admit Gentiles into the church without the necessity of Jewish proselyte requirements. The serious consequences of this are seen in the debate that ensued in Jerusalem (Acts 11:2-3) and later at the council (Acts 15:1-21). The centrality of this event is demonstrated in the extent to which Luke reproduces Peter’s speech, which seems to be a repetition of chapter 10 but is meant to highlight this crucial episode. Often forgotten in the significance of this for the early church is the fact that for Luke the Gentile mission begins with Peter, not Paul. He is the one upon whom the salvific act of God descends; and as the leader of the church, he was the first important witness to it.<\/p>\n<p>The persecution of Herod Agrippa (Acts 12:1-4) was likely due to the furor caused by this free intercourse with Gentiles; and it ended the period of Peter’s leadership in Jerusalem. The Jewish people were greatly offended by the new Christian push; and according to Luke in Acts, the idyllic period of popularity, in which the common people supported the church, effectively ceased at this time. Peter’s miraculous release and the dramatic scene at Mary’s house typified the special place of Peter, but the momentum shifts. Peter is forced to flee Jerusalem, and in the interim James arises to leadership (Acts 12:17); at the Jerusalem council it is the latter who has the chair and presents the council’s decision (Acts 15:6-29).<\/p>\n<p>The exact relationship between Peter and the other disciples, especially with the so-called pillars—James and John—and the apostle Paul, cannot be ascertained. The evidence is too vague. Many have thought that indeed there were no truly universal leaders, for the early church was too diverse. However, that is unlikely, and Luke’s portrayal in Acts parallels Paul’s statement in Galatians 2:8 that Peter was the apostle par excellence to the “circumcised” and Paul to the “Gentiles.” They were the universal leaders, while James became the local leader of the Jerusalem eldership. However, neither Peter nor Paul had dominical status similar to that of later popes (i.e., neither was the absolute spokesman of the church and above criticism). So-called emissaries from James could have such an influence on Peter that he would hypocritically change his behavior before Gentiles (Gal 2:12), and Paul could rebuke Peter publicly for doing so (Gal 2:11-14). Paul never claimed authority over the other disciples and even sought their approval and “the right hands of fellowship” for his ministry to the Gentiles (Gal 2:1-10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersFutureMinistry\">Peter’s Future Ministry<\/p>\n<p>We have very little hard evidence for Peter’s other movements. It seems as though Peter gradually turned from leadership to missionary work. However, this is an oversimplification. It is most likely that, following the similar pattern of Paul, he combined the two. The presence of a “Cephas party” at Corinth (1 Cor 1:12; 3:22) may indicate that Peter had spent some time there. This is made even more likely when Paul uses Peter as the main example for taking one’s wife on missionary expeditions (1 Cor 9:5). The “Cephas party” probably consisted of those who were converted under his ministry; it is probable that they were Jewish Christians and opposed the “Paul party” on Jewish-Gentile debates reflected elsewhere in 1 Corinthians.<\/p>\n<p>The First Epistle of Peter was sent to churches in northern Asia Minor—the provinces of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia. The problem here is that there is no hint that Peter had been there and no personal notations in the epistle to demonstrate his acquaintance with these churches. However, it does show that he was very interested in them. In fact, some believe that the reason why Paul was not allowed into this district according to Acts 16:7-8 was that Peter was already ministering there. In short, the question of Peter’s involvement in Asia Minor must remain an open one.<\/p>\n<p>There is no final NT evidence that Peter went to Rome. First Peter 5:13 says that the epistle was sent from “Babylon,” and it is doubtful that this was the literal Babylon, because there is no tradition that Peter ever went there, and Babylon was sparsely populated back then. It is probably a cryptic symbol for Rome, the “Babylon of the West.” It is most likely that the “Babylon” of Revelation 14:8 and 16:19 is also a symbol of Rome. This would fit the strong tradition in the early church that indeed Peter did minister there.<\/p>\n<p>There are four early external witnesses concerning Peter’s death. John 21:18 mentions only the martyrdom of Peter but does not give any hint as to the place. First Clement was written at the end of the first century and reports the martyrdom of Peter and Paul among others. While 1 Clement 5:4 testifies only to the fact and not the place of Peter’s martyrdom, a study of two aspects favors Rome—the reference to a “great multitude” of martyrdoms, which best fits the Neronian persecution, and the phrase “glorious example among us,” which shows that the people of Clement’s own church (Rome) were involved. Ignatius’s letter to the Romans (4:3) also testifies generally to the martyrdom of Peter and Paul, and again the context favors Rome as the place. He says, “I did not command you as did Peter and Paul,” which shows that they had ministries in Rome. The Ascension of Isaiah 4:2-3, a Jewish Christian work of the same period, speaks of Beliar (probably Nero) who martyrs “one of the Twelve,” almost certainly Peter. Therefore the earliest evidence does not explicitly point to Rome as the place of Peter’s death, but that is the most likely hypothesis.<\/p>\n<p>Definite statements to that effect appear toward the end of the second century. Dionysius, bishop of Corinth, in a letter dated c. 170 (preserved in Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 2.25.8) says that Peter and Paul taught together in Italy. At the end of that century Irenaeus says (in <em>Against Heresies<\/em> 2.1-3) that Peter and Paul preached in Rome, and Tertullian in the same general period adds that Peter was martyred “like . . . the Lord” (<em>Scorpiace<\/em> 15). Clement of Alexandria and Origen both allude to Peter’s presence in Rome, and the latter adds the belief that he was “crucified head-downwards” (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 2.15.2; 3.1.2). The tradition that Peter was crucified may be supported in John 21:18: “when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall . . . carry thee wither thou wouldest not” (<span>kjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The fact that Paul’s Epistle to the Romans (c. 55–57) does not mention Peter tells us that he could not have gone there earlier than that. If 1 Peter was written during the Neronian persecution, as those who hold to Petrine authorship believe, he must have gone there sometime in the late 50s or early 60s. Of course, the extent of his ministry in Rome also cannot be known. Some indeed have posited that he had little or no extensive stay in Rome. The facts, as they can be recovered, point to certain tentative conclusions. Peter did have some type of ministry in Rome, though the extent of it cannot be known. However, it is doubtful, in light of the early testimony to his preaching ministry there, that he was merely passing through Rome when caught in Nero’s pogrom. Therefore he most likely spent the last years of his ministry in Rome and there suffered martyrdom under Nero, perhaps by crucifixion.<\/p>\n<p>Simon Peter, along with Paul, was the leading figure in the early church. His impact has been tragically dimmed by the acrimonious debates of Roman Catholic– Protestant circles, but the biblical evidence is clear. He was the leading disciple of Jesus and indeed the “rock” who provided the foundation for the church. As the representative disciple, his enthusiasm and even his weaknesses have made him the supreme example of the developing disciple, one who, through the power of the risen Lord, rose above his faults to become a towering figure on the church scene.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PETER, <span>The Apostle<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>One of the 12 disciples; rose to prominence both among the disciples during Jesus’ ministry and among the apostles afterwards.<\/p>\n<p>There are actually four forms of Peter’s name in the New Testament: the Hebrew translated into Greek, “Simeon” to “Simon,” and the Aramaic translated into Greek, “Cephas” to “Petros” (meaning “rock”). His given name was Simeon bar-Jonah (Mt 16:17; cf. Jn 1:42), “Simon the son of John,” which was common Semitic nomenclature. It is most likely that “Simon” was not merely the Greek equivalent of “Simeon” but that, having his home in bilingual Galilee, “Simon” was the alternate form he used in dealings with Gentiles. In fact, it was quite common for a cosmopolitan Jew to employ three forms of his name depending on the occasion: Aramaic, Latin, and Greek. The double name “Simon Peter” (or “Simon called Peter”) demonstrates that the second name was a later addition, similar to “Jesus, the Christ.” The number of times that the Aramaic equivalent “Cephas” is used (once in John, four times each in Galatians and 1 Corinthians), as well as its translation into the Greek (not common with proper names), indicates the importance of the secondary name. Both Aramaic and Greek forms mean “the rock,” an obvious indication of Peter’s stature in the early church (see below on Mt 16:18). It is obvious that he was called “Simon” throughout Jesus’ ministry but came to be known as “Peter” more and more in the apostolic age.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Background<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Conversion and Call<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Place among the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>• Peter the Rock<\/p>\n<p>• Peter the Apostle<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Future Ministry<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersBackground\">Peter’s Background<\/p>\n<p>Peter was raised in bilingual Galilee. John 1:44 says that the home of Andrew (his brother) and Peter was Bethsaida, the whereabouts of which is difficult to place archaeologically. The only site about which we know is east of the Jordan in the district called Gaulanitis. Yet John 12:21 places Bethsaida in Galilee; however, it is possible that John is reflecting the popular use of the term “Galilee” rather than the legally correct one. Peter and Andrew had a fishing business centered in Capernaum (Mk 1:21, 29) and perhaps were partners with James and John (Lk 5:10). It is also likely that they intermittently continued in their business while disciples, as indicated in the fishing scene in John 21:1-8.<\/p>\n<p>One difficulty with this is the series of statements saying, “We have left all and followed You” (Mt 19:27; Mk 10:28; Lk 18:28, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The majority of interpreters have given this an absolute sense of “sold” or “left” their business. However, Luke 18:28 occurs in the context of leaving their homes but obviously is not meant in an absolute sense. It seems most likely that the disciples did leave the practice of their fishing businesses to follow Christ, but kept the tools of their trade and returned to their trades when necessary.<\/p>\n<p>They certainly did not abandon their families, as evidenced by Peter, who returned to his home at the end of each tour. The New Testament tells us that Peter was married. In Mark 1:29-31 Jesus heals his mother-in-law, who perhaps was living with Peter. In fact, it is possible that his home became Jesus’ headquarters in Galilee. (Matthew 8:14 may indicate that Jesus dwelt there.) First Corinthians 9:5 says that Peter, along with the other married apostles, often took his wife with him on his missionary journeys. Later tradition speaks of his children (Clement of Alexandria’s <em>Stromateis<\/em> 2.6.52) and says that Peter was present at the martyrdom of his wife (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 3.30.2).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersConversionandCall\">Peter’s Conversion and Call<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s brother, Andrew, was a disciple of John the Baptist, according to John 1:35-40. This follows the witness of John in 1:29-34 and is the second stage of John’s discipleship drama in chapter one—i.e., after bearing witness he now sends his own followers to Jesus. Andrew and the unnamed disciple (perhaps Philip as in Jn 1:43 or the “beloved disciple,” whom many identify with John himself) then “follow” Jesus (a term used often in John for discipleship). The next day Andrew follows the Baptist’s example and finds his brother Simon, saying, “We have found the Messiah” (Jn 1:41, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Peter’s conversion is presupposed in John 1:42, where Simon is brought to Jesus by Andrew and there given a new name.<\/p>\n<p>There are three separate episodes in the Gospels in which Simon is called, and these overlap with three episodes in which he is given the name “Cephas” (“Peter,” which means “rock”) by Jesus. John locates the event in Judea where John the Baptist was baptizing. The synoptic Gospels have two different scenes. The first call takes place at the Sea of Galilee (Mk 1:16-20; Mt 4:18-22). Jesus is walking along the shore and sees Peter and Andrew along with James and John casting their nets into the sea. At this time he calls them to become “fishers of men.” Luke then expands this into a fishing scene (Lk 5:1-11), in which the disciples have fished all night and caught nothing but at the command of Jesus lower their nets and catch an amount of fish so great that the boat starts to sink. The episode concludes exactly like the Markan abbreviated form: Jesus says that from now on they will “catch men,” and as a result they leave everything and follow him.<\/p>\n<p>The second synoptic episode involving Peter’s call (and his new name) is the official choice of the Twelve upon the mountain (Mk 3:13-19 and parallels); in the list of the names we have “Simon he surnamed Peter.” The final occurrence dealing with Peter’s new name is found in Matthew 16:17-19, in connection with Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi.<\/p>\n<p>It is somewhat difficult to harmonize these episodes properly. Were there three different episodes in which Simon was called (Jn 1:42; Mk 1:20; 3:16) and three separate incidents in which he was given the name Cephas\/Peter (Jn 1:42; Mk 3:16; Mt 16:18)? It is attractive to a broad spectrum of academia to assume that one single event, which happened at some indeterminate time toward the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, was later expanded into these diverse traditions. However, a closer examination of the Gospel data does not necessitate such a conclusion. John 1:35-42 is not an institutional scene that connotes an official call. Rather, it describes the first encounter with Jesus and realization regarding his significance. The “renaming” is in the future tense and looks to a later event. Moreover, John deliberately omits most of the crisis events in Jesus’ life (the baptism, the choice of the Twelve, the Transfiguration, the words of institution at the Last Supper, Gethsemane) and replaces them with highly theological scenes that teach the spiritual significance of the events. This is what he has done here.<\/p>\n<p>The same is true of the first synoptic call, i.e., the fishing scene. Again, there is no hint of official ordination to office here but rather a proleptic or prophetic hint of future ministry. This is especially true of the highly theological scene in Luke, which promises abundant results. Again in all three accounts the future tense is employed: “I will make you fishers of men” (Matthew and Mark), “You will catch men” (Luke, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The call in Mark 1:20 and Matthew 4:21 and their reaction (leaving all behind and following Jesus) is the opening gambit that is finalized in the actual institutional scene in Mark 3:13-19 and parallels. The wording does not indicate that these two episodes are doublets, for the actual appointment of the disciples occurs in the second passage. We must differentiate between the original call to one segment (who became the so-called “inner circle” of the Twelve) and the final choice of all the disciples.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersPlaceamongtheTwelve\">Peter’s Place among the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>The prominence of Simon Peter in the Gospels and Acts cannot be disputed. While some have attempted to attribute this to his leadership role in the later church, there is no basis for that in the text of the NT. From the very beginning Simon attained preeminence above the others. In the lists of the Twelve just mentioned, Simon’s name always appears first, and in Matthew 10:2 it introduces his name as “the first.” Moreover, the Twelve are often designated “Peter and those with him” (Mk 1:36; Lk 9:32; 8:45, <span>nkjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Throughout the accounts Peter acted and spoke on behalf of the other disciples. At the Transfiguration it is Peter who wanted to erect tents (Mk 9:5), and he alone had sufficient faith to attempt walking on the water (Mt 14:28-31). It is Peter who asks the Lord to explain his teaching on forgiveness (Mt 18:21) and parables (Mt 15:15; Lk 12:41) and who speaks the disciples’ minds in Matthew 19:27, “Behold, we have left everything and followed you; what’s in it for us?” (paraphrased). The collectors of the temple tax come to Peter as leader of the group (Mt 17:24). As a member of the inner circle (with James and John, possibly Andrew in Mk 13:3) he was often alone with Jesus (at the raising of Jairus’s daughter, Mk 5:37 and parallels; at the Transfiguration, Mk 9:2 and parallels; at Gethsemane, Mk 14:33 and Mt 26:37). Jesus asks Peter and John to prepare the Passover meal in Luke 22:8, and in Mark 14:37 (and Mt 26:40) he directs his rebuke to Peter as representing the others (“Could ye not watch with me one hour?”). Finally, the message of the angel at the tomb as recorded in Mark 16:7 said, “Go your way, tell his disciples and Peter.” Certainly Peter held a very special place among the Twelve.<\/p>\n<p>This was especially evident in the Caesarea Philippi episode (Mk 8:27-33 and parallels). It was Peter whose confession became the high point of the Gospel accounts, “Thou art the Christ” (Luke adds “of God”; Matthew, “the Son of the living God”). After Jesus then spoke of the suffering of the Son of Man, Peter rebuked him, and in Mark’s description Jesus then turned, gazed at all the disciples, and said to Peter, “Get thee behind me, Satan: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but the things that be of men” (v 33, <span>kjv<\/span>). This was obviously directed at them all through Peter.<\/p>\n<p>The portrait of Peter that comes through all four accounts pictures him as impulsive, often rash; he is the first to act and speak his mind and was typified by his enthusiasm for everything in which he had a part. At the sight of Jesus walking on the water, Peter asked that the Lord command him to do the same and then immediately leaped out of the boat and began doing just that. At the Transfiguration, while the others were awed into silence by the appearance of Moses and Elijah, Peter the man of action said, “If thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles” (Mt 17:4, <span>kjv<\/span>). Mark and Luke both add here that Peter did not know what he was saying. Peter’s unguarded and unthinking tendency to protest Jesus’ statements is seen not only at Caesarea Philippi but also at the foot-washing scene in John 13:4-11 when he said first, “You shall never ever wash my feet”; and then after Jesus’ strong retort, “If I do not wash you, you have no part with Me,” he reversed himself completely, stating, “Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and head” (13:8-9, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Finally, in the account of the race to the tomb (Jn 20:2-10), the beloved disciple, reaching the tomb first, paused while Peter immediately and impulsively entered it. Peter was certainly one who “rushed in where angels fear to tread.” However, this very trait aligns him with all of us and may be one of the major reasons why he becomes the representative disciple throughout the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetertheRock\">Peter the Rock<\/p>\n<p>The key to the significance of Simon Peter is obviously the controversial addendum to the Caesarea Philippi episode, found only in Matthew 16:17-19, Jesus’ testimonial to Peter. There are several crucial aspects of this saying. The most important for this study is verse 18, “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church” (<span>kjv<\/span>). There have been many interpretations of this down through history: (1) It refers to Peter as the “rock” or first bishop of the church. This was the Roman Catholic interpretation from the third century on and was employed as a prooftext for apostolic succession, but it is not hinted at anywhere in the context or even in the epistles: it was not a first-century concept. (2) The majority of Protestants since the Reformation have taken this to be a reference to Peter’s statement of faith rather than to Peter himself; but this neglects the wordplay, which is even more pronounced in Aramaic, which has only one form for “Cephas” (rock). (3) An alternative has been to take “this rock” as a reference to Jesus himself, but that is fanciful and is hardly in the context. In conclusion, “this rock” is almost certainly a reference to Peter, but it must be understood in two ways. First, Peter was to become the foundation upon which Christ would build his church, a position clearly attested to in Acts. This does not mean that Peter had an authority above the other apostles. Paul’s rebuke of Peter in Galatians 2:11-14 demonstrates that he was not above them, and at the Jerusalem council in Acts 15 it is James who has the position of leadership. Second, Peter is seen here not merely as an individual but as the representative of the disciples. This view is coming to increasing prominence today. It recognized the Jewish concept of “corporate identity” in which the leader was identified with the corporate body (e.g., the king or high priest representing the nation before God). This concept is also in keeping with Matthew 18:18-20, which passes on the same authority to the church as is here given to Peter. In this view Peter as the rock becomes the first of the building blocks upon which Christ, the chief cornerstone (to continue the metaphor), will build his church (see Eph 2:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>Two other aspects are worthy of note here. First, verse 18 says, “the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” The “gates of hell” is a common Jewish euphemism for death’s inevitable and irrevocable power. Jesus is saying that Satan will not be triumphant over the church, and his sphere of operations, death, will be defeated (cf. 1 Cor 15:26, 54-55). The church would undergo persecution and martyrdom, but the church would be triumphant.<\/p>\n<p>Second, verse 19 promises, “I will give unto thee [singular] the keys of the kingdom,” another statement used of apostolic succession by the medieval church. Again, this must be understood in light of corporate identity; Peter, as the preeminent figure in the early church, here embodies the community in his leadership. The “keys of the kingdom” are in direct contrast to the “gates of hell” (cf. Rv 1:18, “the keys of hell and death” and Rv 3:7, the “key of David”), and this follows the imagery of the building seen in the rock upon which Christ will build his church. Here Peter is given the keys that will unlock the power of the kingdom in building God’s community, the church. The future tense (“will give”) undoubtedly points to the postresurrection period, when that power was unleashed and the church erected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetertheApostle\">Peter the Apostle<\/p>\n<p>Two events led to the new Peter who fills the pages of Acts: his reinstatement described in John 21:15-17 and the resurrection appearance of the Lord, which is never described but alluded to in Luke 24:34 and 1 Corinthians 15:5. His denial was certainly proof that he was not yet able to assume his predicted position as the rock of the church. Both Luke and Paul seem to state that the risen Lord appeared to Simon Peter before the others, which would be fitting in light of his preeminence in the early church. During the Palestinian era, the fifteen-year period prior to the Gentile mission, Peter was the leading figure. The others mentioned in Acts 1–12 are all secondary to Peter, the dominant director of church policy. These include John, who is with Peter in the temple (3:1), the prison (4:13), and Samaria (8:14); Stephen, who was one of the Seven and whose revolutionary preaching led to his martyrdom (chs 6–7); Philip, another of the Seven who proclaimed the gospel in Samaria and to the Ethiopian eunuch (ch 8); Barnabas, who set an example of communal sharing (4:36-37) and was an official delegate to Antioch (11:20-30); Paul, a miraculous convert and witness (9:1-30; 11:25-30; 12:25); and James, who became the first apostolic martyr (12:2). It is Peter who proposes the choice of the 12th disciple (1:15-17), who proclaims the gospel at Pentecost (2:14-40), who utters the healing word (3:6), and who defends the gospel before the Sanhedrin (4:8-12, 19-20; 5:29-32). The episode regarding Ananias and Sapphira is particularly poignant, for here Peter functions as the avenging messenger of God; nowhere is his authority more evident. We would also note his authority in the scene at Samaria concerning the attempt of Simon the Sorcerer to buy the charismatic power (8:18-24). Again, it is Peter whose influence commands the situation. In these two incidents we certainly see the “binding and loosing” jurisdiction (cf. Mt 16:19) exhibited in Peter.<\/p>\n<p>Yet Peter and the church still came under the strictures of their Jewish heritage. The evidence points to a Jewish proselyte self-consciousness on the part of the early church. They viewed themselves as the righteous remnant, living in the age of Messianic fulfillment, but still interpreted themselves in a Jewish sense and conducted their evangelism in the proselyte form of Jewish particularism (i.e., Gentiles could only be converted through Judaism). Two events altered this. First, the Hellenistic Jewish branch of the church rebelled against the Hebrew Christians, which resulted in the appointment of the seven deacons and a change in the orthodox policy of the Palestinian church. Second, this then led to a new preaching ministry, first by Stephen, whose insights ended in his martyrdom and the dispersal of the Hellenistic branch in chapter 8; then by Philip and others, who extended the gospel even further, to the Samaritans and God-fearers. As a further result, Peter and John came to Samaria (8:14), the next significant step toward the Gentile mission. Thus ended the centrality of Jerusalem in the unfolding story.<\/p>\n<p>The two miracles of Peter, at Lydda (the paralytic) and Joppa (raising the dead woman) in Acts 9:32-42, are probably intended to parallel similar miracles of Jesus in Luke’s first work (Lk 5:18-26; 8:49-56). This is part of a major theme in Acts whereby Jesus’ life and ministry are paralleled and continued in the work of the Spirit through the church. Again Peter is seen in a representative role.<\/p>\n<p>The new relationships are extended in two further scenes. First, Peter stays with “Simon, a tanner,” in Joppa, an unclean trade; no pious Jew would knowingly have social contact with such a one. Even more important, God teaches Peter through a dream (10:10-16) that the old dichotomy between clean and unclean has been broken. This then leads Peter to the home of an uncircumcised Gentile, the most serious social taboo for the Jew, and subsequent events force Peter to admit Gentiles into the church without the necessity of Jewish proselyte requirements. The serious consequences of this are seen in the debate that ensued in Jerusalem (Acts 11:2-3) and later at the council (Acts 15:1-21). The centrality of this event is demonstrated in the extent to which Luke reproduces Peter’s speech, which seems to be a repetition of chapter 10 but is meant to highlight this crucial episode. Often forgotten in the significance of this for the early church is the fact that for Luke the Gentile mission begins with Peter, not Paul. He is the one upon whom the salvific act of God descends; and as the leader of the church, he was the first important witness to it.<\/p>\n<p>The persecution of Herod Agrippa (Acts 12:1-4) was likely due to the furor caused by this free intercourse with Gentiles; and it ended the period of Peter’s leadership in Jerusalem. The Jewish people were greatly offended by the new Christian push; and according to Luke in Acts, the idyllic period of popularity, in which the common people supported the church, effectively ceased at this time. Peter’s miraculous release and the dramatic scene at Mary’s house typified the special place of Peter, but the momentum shifts. Peter is forced to flee Jerusalem, and in the interim James arises to leadership (Acts 12:17); at the Jerusalem council it is the latter who has the chair and presents the council’s decision (Acts 15:6-29).<\/p>\n<p>The exact relationship between Peter and the other disciples, especially with the so-called pillars—James and John—and the apostle Paul, cannot be ascertained. The evidence is too vague. Many have thought that indeed there were no truly universal leaders, for the early church was too diverse. However, that is unlikely, and Luke’s portrayal in Acts parallels Paul’s statement in Galatians 2:8 that Peter was the apostle par excellence to the “circumcised” and Paul to the “Gentiles.” They were the universal leaders, while James became the local leader of the Jerusalem eldership. However, neither Peter nor Paul had dominical status similar to that of later popes (i.e., neither was the absolute spokesman of the church and above criticism). So-called emissaries from James could have such an influence on Peter that he would hypocritically change his behavior before Gentiles (Gal 2:12), and Paul could rebuke Peter publicly for doing so (Gal 2:11-14). Paul never claimed authority over the other disciples and even sought their approval and “the right hands of fellowship” for his ministry to the Gentiles (Gal 2:1-10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersFutureMinistry\">Peter’s Future Ministry<\/p>\n<p>We have very little hard evidence for Peter’s other movements. It seems as though Peter gradually turned from leadership to missionary work. However, this is an oversimplification. It is most likely that, following the similar pattern of Paul, he combined the two. The presence of a “Cephas party” at Corinth (1 Cor 1:12; 3:22) may indicate that Peter had spent some time there. This is made even more likely when Paul uses Peter as the main example for taking one’s wife on missionary expeditions (1 Cor 9:5). The “Cephas party” probably consisted of those who were converted under his ministry; it is probable that they were Jewish Christians and opposed the “Paul party” on Jewish-Gentile debates reflected elsewhere in 1 Corinthians.<\/p>\n<p>The First Epistle of Peter was sent to churches in northern Asia Minor—the provinces of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia. The problem here is that there is no hint that Peter had been there and no personal notations in the epistle to demonstrate his acquaintance with these churches. However, it does show that he was very interested in them. In fact, some believe that the reason why Paul was not allowed into this district according to Acts 16:7-8 was that Peter was already ministering there. In short, the question of Peter’s involvement in Asia Minor must remain an open one.<\/p>\n<p>There is no final NT evidence that Peter went to Rome. First Peter 5:13 says that the epistle was sent from “Babylon,” and it is doubtful that this was the literal Babylon, because there is no tradition that Peter ever went there, and Babylon was sparsely populated back then. It is probably a cryptic symbol for Rome, the “Babylon of the West.” It is most likely that the “Babylon” of Revelation 14:8 and 16:19 is also a symbol of Rome. This would fit the strong tradition in the early church that indeed Peter did minister there.<\/p>\n<p>There are four early external witnesses concerning Peter’s death. John 21:18 mentions only the martyrdom of Peter but does not give any hint as to the place. First Clement was written at the end of the first century and reports the martyrdom of Peter and Paul among others. While 1 Clement 5:4 testifies only to the fact and not the place of Peter’s martyrdom, a study of two aspects favors Rome—the reference to a “great multitude” of martyrdoms, which best fits the Neronian persecution, and the phrase “glorious example among us,” which shows that the people of Clement’s own church (Rome) were involved. Ignatius’s letter to the Romans (4:3) also testifies generally to the martyrdom of Peter and Paul, and again the context favors Rome as the place. He says, “I did not command you as did Peter and Paul,” which shows that they had ministries in Rome. The Ascension of Isaiah 4:2-3, a Jewish Christian work of the same period, speaks of Beliar (probably Nero) who martyrs “one of the Twelve,” almost certainly Peter. Therefore the earliest evidence does not explicitly point to Rome as the place of Peter’s death, but that is the most likely hypothesis.<\/p>\n<p>Definite statements to that effect appear toward the end of the second century. Dionysius, bishop of Corinth, in a letter dated c. 170 (preserved in Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 2.25.8) says that Peter and Paul taught together in Italy. At the end of that century Irenaeus says (in <em>Against Heresies<\/em> 2.1-3) that Peter and Paul preached in Rome, and Tertullian in the same general period adds that Peter was martyred “like . . . the Lord” (<em>Scorpiace<\/em> 15). Clement of Alexandria and Origen both allude to Peter’s presence in Rome, and the latter adds the belief that he was “crucified head-downwards” (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 2.15.2; 3.1.2). The tradition that Peter was crucified may be supported in John 21:18: “when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall . . . carry thee wither thou wouldest not” (<span>kjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The fact that Paul’s Epistle to the Romans (c. 55–57) does not mention Peter tells us that he could not have gone there earlier than that. If 1 Peter was written during the Neronian persecution, as those who hold to Petrine authorship believe, he must have gone there sometime in the late 50s or early 60s. Of course, the extent of his ministry in Rome also cannot be known. Some indeed have posited that he had little or no extensive stay in Rome. The facts, as they can be recovered, point to certain tentative conclusions. Peter did have some type of ministry in Rome, though the extent of it cannot be known. However, it is doubtful, in light of the early testimony to his preaching ministry there, that he was merely passing through Rome when caught in Nero’s pogrom. Therefore he most likely spent the last years of his ministry in Rome and there suffered martyrdom under Nero, perhaps by crucifixion.<\/p>\n<p>Simon Peter, along with Paul, was the leading figure in the early church. His impact has been tragically dimmed by the acrimonious debates of Roman Catholic– Protestant circles, but the biblical evidence is clear. He was the leading disciple of Jesus and indeed the “rock” who provided the foundation for the church. As the representative disciple, his enthusiasm and even his weaknesses have made him the supreme example of the developing disciple, one who, through the power of the risen Lord, rose above his faults to become a towering figure on the church scene.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PETER, The Apostle One of the 12 disciples; rose to prominence both among the disciples during Jesus’ ministry and among the apostles afterwards. There are actually four forms of Peter’s name in the New Testament: the Hebrew translated into Greek, “Simeon” to “Simon,” and the Aramaic translated into Greek, “Cephas” to “Petros” (meaning “rock”). His given name was Simeon bar-Jonah (Mt 16:17; cf. Jn 1:42), “Simon the son of John,” which was common Semitic nomenclature. It is most likely that “S...","summary_en":"PETER, The Apostle One of the 12 disciples; rose to prominence both among the disciples during Jesus’ ministry and among the apostles afterwards. There are actually four forms of Peter’s name in the New Testament: the Hebrew translated into Greek, “Simeon” to “Simon,” and the Aramaic translated into Greek, “Cephas” to “Petros” (meaning “rock”). His given name was Simeon bar-Jonah (Mt 16:17; cf. Jn 1:42), “Simon the son of John,” which was common Semitic nomenclature. It is most likely that “S...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56333,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:43","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:43","content_ro":"<p><strong>1:43-44<\/strong> <em>Galilee<\/em> was the region of northern Israel around the Sea of Galilee. • <em>Bethsaida<\/em> (“house of fishing”) was a village on Galilee’s north shore and the home of Peter, Andrew, and Philip. Later, Peter and Andrew moved to Capernaum, a village west of Bethsaida (Mark 1:21, 29).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>1:43-44<\/strong> <em>Galilee<\/em> was the region of northern Israel around the Sea of Galilee. • <em>Bethsaida<\/em> (“house of fishing”) was a village on Galilee’s north shore and the home of Peter, Andrew, and Philip. Later, Peter and Andrew moved to Capernaum, a village west of Bethsaida (Mark 1:21, 29).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:43-44 Galilee was the region of northern Israel around the Sea of Galilee. • Bethsaida (“house of fishing”) was a village on Galilee’s north shore and the home of Peter, Andrew, and Philip. Later, Peter and Andrew moved to Capernaum, a village west of Bethsaida (Mark 1:21, 29).","summary_en":"1:43-44 Galilee was the region of northern Israel around the Sea of Galilee. • Bethsaida (“house of fishing”) was a village on Galilee’s north shore and the home of Peter, Andrew, and Philip. Later, Peter and Andrew moved to Capernaum, a village west of Bethsaida (Mark 1:21, 29).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83959,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:43","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:43","content_ro":"<p><strong>1:43-44<\/strong> <em>Galilee<\/em> was the region of northern Israel around the Sea of Galilee. • <em>Bethsaida<\/em> (“house of fishing”) was a village on Galilee’s north shore and the home of Peter, Andrew, and Philip. Later, Peter and Andrew moved to Capernaum, a village west of Bethsaida (Mark 1:21, 29).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>1:43-44<\/strong> <em>Galilee<\/em> was the region of northern Israel around the Sea of Galilee. • <em>Bethsaida<\/em> (“house of fishing”) was a village on Galilee’s north shore and the home of Peter, Andrew, and Philip. Later, Peter and Andrew moved to Capernaum, a village west of Bethsaida (Mark 1:21, 29).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:43-44 Galilee was the region of northern Israel around the Sea of Galilee. • Bethsaida (“house of fishing”) was a village on Galilee’s north shore and the home of Peter, Andrew, and Philip. Later, Peter and Andrew moved to Capernaum, a village west of Bethsaida (Mark 1:21, 29).","summary_en":"1:43-44 Galilee was the region of northern Israel around the Sea of Galilee. • Bethsaida (“house of fishing”) was a village on Galilee’s north shore and the home of Peter, Andrew, and Philip. Later, Peter and Andrew moved to Capernaum, a village west of Bethsaida (Mark 1:21, 29).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111585,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:43","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:43","content_ro":"<p><strong>1:43-44<\/strong> <em>Galilee<\/em> was the region of northern Israel around the Sea of Galilee. • <em>Bethsaida<\/em> (“house of fishing”) was a village on Galilee’s north shore and the home of Peter, Andrew, and Philip. Later, Peter and Andrew moved to Capernaum, a village west of Bethsaida (Mark 1:21, 29).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>1:43-44<\/strong> <em>Galilee<\/em> was the region of northern Israel around the Sea of Galilee. • <em>Bethsaida<\/em> (“house of fishing”) was a village on Galilee’s north shore and the home of Peter, Andrew, and Philip. Later, Peter and Andrew moved to Capernaum, a village west of Bethsaida (Mark 1:21, 29).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:43-44 Galilee was the region of northern Israel around the Sea of Galilee. • Bethsaida (“house of fishing”) was a village on Galilee’s north shore and the home of Peter, Andrew, and Philip. Later, Peter and Andrew moved to Capernaum, a village west of Bethsaida (Mark 1:21, 29).","summary_en":"1:43-44 Galilee was the region of northern Israel around the Sea of Galilee. • Bethsaida (“house of fishing”) was a village on Galilee’s north shore and the home of Peter, Andrew, and Philip. Later, Peter and Andrew moved to Capernaum, a village west of Bethsaida (Mark 1:21, 29).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139211,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:43","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:43","content_ro":"<p><strong>1:43-44<\/strong> <em>Galilee<\/em> was the region of northern Israel around the Sea of Galilee. • <em>Bethsaida<\/em> (“house of fishing”) was a village on Galilee’s north shore and the home of Peter, Andrew, and Philip. Later, Peter and Andrew moved to Capernaum, a village west of Bethsaida (Mark 1:21, 29).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>1:43-44<\/strong> <em>Galilee<\/em> was the region of northern Israel around the Sea of Galilee. • <em>Bethsaida<\/em> (“house of fishing”) was a village on Galilee’s north shore and the home of Peter, Andrew, and Philip. Later, Peter and Andrew moved to Capernaum, a village west of Bethsaida (Mark 1:21, 29).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:43-44 Galilee was the region of northern Israel around the Sea of Galilee. • Bethsaida (“house of fishing”) was a village on Galilee’s north shore and the home of Peter, Andrew, and Philip. Later, Peter and Andrew moved to Capernaum, a village west of Bethsaida (Mark 1:21, 29).","summary_en":"1:43-44 Galilee was the region of northern Israel around the Sea of Galilee. • Bethsaida (“house of fishing”) was a village on Galilee’s north shore and the home of Peter, Andrew, and Philip. Later, Peter and Andrew moved to Capernaum, a village west of Bethsaida (Mark 1:21, 29).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65532,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Encounters with Jesus","title_en":"Encounters with Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","summary_ro":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","summary_en":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93158,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Encounters with Jesus","title_en":"Encounters with Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","summary_ro":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","summary_en":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120784,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Encounters with Jesus","title_en":"Encounters with Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","summary_ro":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","summary_en":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148410,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Encounters with Jesus","title_en":"Encounters with Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","summary_ro":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","summary_en":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"44":[{"id":42096,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69722,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97348,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":124974,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":1594,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Andrew, the Apostle","title_en":"Andrew, the Apostle","content_ro":"<h3>ANDREW, T<span>he<\/span> A<span>postle<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>One of Christ’s 12 apostles. Andrew first appears in the NT as a disciple of John the Baptist (Jn 1:35, 40). After hearing John say, “Look, there is the Lamb of God!” (Jn 1:36), referring to Jesus, Andrew and another unnamed disciple followed Jesus and stayed with him for a day (Jn 1:36-39). Andrew then told his brother, Simon Peter, that he had found the Messiah and brought Peter to Jesus (Jn 1:40-42). From then on Andrew faded into the background, and his brother came into prominence. Whenever the relationship of the two is mentioned, Andrew is always described as the brother of Simon Peter and never the other way around (Mt 4:18; Mk 1:16; Jn 1:40; 6:8), although Andrew is also mentioned without reference to his relationship to Peter (Mk 1:29; 3:18; 13:3; Jn 12:22). Andrew’s father was John (Mt 16:17; Jn 1:42; 21:15-17), and his hometown was Bethsaida (Jn 1:44), a village on the north shore of the Sea of Galilee.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John mentions disciples being with Jesus (2:2; 4:2), and it is likely that Andrew was one of that early group. Evidently, however, he returned to his activity as a fisherman on the Sea of Galilee, where he shared a house with Peter and his family in Capernaum (Mt 4:18-20; Mk 1:16-18, 29-33). While they were fishing, Andrew and Peter received a definite call to follow Jesus and become those who fish for people. From among the disciples of Jesus a group of 12 were later specially chosen as apostles. Andrew is always listed among the first four named, along with Peter and two other brothers, John and James (Mt 10:2-4; Lk 6:13-16; Acts 1:13).<\/p>\n<p>Andrew is named in only three other contexts in the Gospels. At the feeding of the 5,000 he called attention to the boy who had five barley loaves and two fish (Jn 6:8-9). When certain Greeks came to Philip, asking to see Jesus, Philip told Andrew and then the two of them told Jesus (Jn 12:20-22). Finally, Andrew is listed among those who were questioning Jesus privately on the Mt of Olives (Mk 13:3-4). The last NT mention of Andrew is in the list of apostles waiting in the upper room in Jerusalem for the promised outpouring of the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:12-14).<\/p>\n<p>Various documents associated with Andrew, such as the Acts of Andrew mentioned by the early church historian Eusebius, are of doubtful value. Some traditions indicate that Andrew ministered in Scythia. According to the Muratorian Canon, Andrew received a revelation at night that the apostle John should write the fourth Gospel. Tradition is rather uniform that Andrew died at Patrae in Achaia. A story developed that he was martyred on an X-shaped cross (a “decussate” or “saltire” cross), which has become known as St Andrew’s Cross. Another tradition is that an arm of the dead Andrew was taken into Scotland as a relic by Regulus, and thus Andrew became known as a patron saint of Scotland. On the calendar of saints of the Roman and Greek churches, Andrew’s date is set as November 30. <em>See<\/em> Apocrypha (Specific Titles of Apocryphal Writings): Andrew, Acts of; Andrew, Story of; Andrew and Matthias, Acts of; Andrew and Paul, Acts of.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Apostle, Apostleship.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ANDREW, T<span>he<\/span> A<span>postle<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>One of Christ’s 12 apostles. Andrew first appears in the NT as a disciple of John the Baptist (Jn 1:35, 40). After hearing John say, “Look, there is the Lamb of God!” (Jn 1:36), referring to Jesus, Andrew and another unnamed disciple followed Jesus and stayed with him for a day (Jn 1:36-39). Andrew then told his brother, Simon Peter, that he had found the Messiah and brought Peter to Jesus (Jn 1:40-42). From then on Andrew faded into the background, and his brother came into prominence. Whenever the relationship of the two is mentioned, Andrew is always described as the brother of Simon Peter and never the other way around (Mt 4:18; Mk 1:16; Jn 1:40; 6:8), although Andrew is also mentioned without reference to his relationship to Peter (Mk 1:29; 3:18; 13:3; Jn 12:22). Andrew’s father was John (Mt 16:17; Jn 1:42; 21:15-17), and his hometown was Bethsaida (Jn 1:44), a village on the north shore of the Sea of Galilee.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John mentions disciples being with Jesus (2:2; 4:2), and it is likely that Andrew was one of that early group. Evidently, however, he returned to his activity as a fisherman on the Sea of Galilee, where he shared a house with Peter and his family in Capernaum (Mt 4:18-20; Mk 1:16-18, 29-33). While they were fishing, Andrew and Peter received a definite call to follow Jesus and become those who fish for people. From among the disciples of Jesus a group of 12 were later specially chosen as apostles. Andrew is always listed among the first four named, along with Peter and two other brothers, John and James (Mt 10:2-4; Lk 6:13-16; Acts 1:13).<\/p>\n<p>Andrew is named in only three other contexts in the Gospels. At the feeding of the 5,000 he called attention to the boy who had five barley loaves and two fish (Jn 6:8-9). When certain Greeks came to Philip, asking to see Jesus, Philip told Andrew and then the two of them told Jesus (Jn 12:20-22). Finally, Andrew is listed among those who were questioning Jesus privately on the Mt of Olives (Mk 13:3-4). The last NT mention of Andrew is in the list of apostles waiting in the upper room in Jerusalem for the promised outpouring of the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:12-14).<\/p>\n<p>Various documents associated with Andrew, such as the Acts of Andrew mentioned by the early church historian Eusebius, are of doubtful value. Some traditions indicate that Andrew ministered in Scythia. According to the Muratorian Canon, Andrew received a revelation at night that the apostle John should write the fourth Gospel. Tradition is rather uniform that Andrew died at Patrae in Achaia. A story developed that he was martyred on an X-shaped cross (a “decussate” or “saltire” cross), which has become known as St Andrew’s Cross. Another tradition is that an arm of the dead Andrew was taken into Scotland as a relic by Regulus, and thus Andrew became known as a patron saint of Scotland. On the calendar of saints of the Roman and Greek churches, Andrew’s date is set as November 30. <em>See<\/em> Apocrypha (Specific Titles of Apocryphal Writings): Andrew, Acts of; Andrew, Story of; Andrew and Matthias, Acts of; Andrew and Paul, Acts of.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Apostle, Apostleship.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ANDREW, The Apostle One of Christ’s 12 apostles. Andrew first appears in the NT as a disciple of John the Baptist (Jn 1:35, 40). After hearing John say, “Look, there is the Lamb of God!” (Jn 1:36), referring to Jesus, Andrew and another unnamed disciple followed Jesus and stayed with him for a day (Jn 1:36-39). Andrew then told his brother, Simon Peter, that he had found the Messiah and brought Peter to Jesus (Jn 1:40-42). From then on Andrew faded into the background, and his brother came in...","summary_en":"ANDREW, The Apostle One of Christ’s 12 apostles. Andrew first appears in the NT as a disciple of John the Baptist (Jn 1:35, 40). After hearing John say, “Look, there is the Lamb of God!” (Jn 1:36), referring to Jesus, Andrew and another unnamed disciple followed Jesus and stayed with him for a day (Jn 1:36-39). Andrew then told his brother, Simon Peter, that he had found the Messiah and brought Peter to Jesus (Jn 1:40-42). From then on Andrew faded into the background, and his brother came in...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":4548,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Bethsaida","title_en":"Bethsaida","content_ro":"<h3>BETHSAIDA<\/h3>\n<li>1. Town northeast of the Sea of Galilee. Bethsaida was the home of three of Jesus’ disciples: Andrew, Peter, and Philip (Jn 1:44; 12:21). Jesus announced that calamity would come upon Bethsaida because of its unbelief in spite of the mighty works he had done there (Mt 11:21-22; Lk 10:13). A blind man was healed in Bethsaida (Mk 8:22-26), and nearby over 5,000 people were fed by the miracle of the loaves and fish (Mk 6:34-45; Lk 9:10-17).<\/li>\n<p>Bethsaida is mentioned in several ancient sources, chiefly the writings of Josephus, a first-century <span>AD<\/span> Jewish historian. Two Bethsaidas, one on each side of the Sea of Galilee, were once postulated because the reference in Mark mentions the feeding of the 5,000 as happening across the lake from Bethsaida, whereas in Luke it seems to have taken place near Bethsaida. One solution is that the miracle occurred in the district surrounding Bethsaida, but that the quickest way to reach the city itself was to cross part of the lake. Such an interpretation questions the traditional location of the miracle (et-Tabgha on the west shore, nearer to Capernaum) but is preferable to the proposal of two Bethsaidas so close to each other.<\/p>\n<p>Bethsaida was merely a fishing village until it was enlarged and beautified by Philip the tetrarch (4 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 34), son of Herod the Great, after the death of Caesar Augustus. Philip was later buried there, according to Josephus. Bethsaida’s name was changed to Julias in honor of Julia, daughter of Augustus. That city was defended by Josephus when he was its military commander during the first Jewish revolt against Rome (<span>AD<\/span> 66–70).<\/p>\n<p>Josephus wrote that Bethsaida was “at the lake of Gennesareth” but “near to the Jordan River.” He also said that it was in lower Gaulanitis, a district that touched the northeast quarter of the Sea of Galilee. There is, however, no ancient “tell” or ruin fitting the size or description of the city near either the lake or the river. A suggestion that the small harbor of el-’Araj is the site of Bethsaida has little archaeological support, but et-Tell, located about two miles (3.2 kilometers) from the lake, shows evidence of extensive Roman occupation and building activity. At present, et-Tell seems to be the most satisfactory candidate for identification of Bethsaida.<\/p>\n<li>2. A variant name for the pool at Jerusalem, otherwise called Bethesda or Beth-zatha. <em>See<\/em> Bethesda; Beth-zatha.<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>BETHSAIDA<\/h3>\n<li>1. Town northeast of the Sea of Galilee. Bethsaida was the home of three of Jesus’ disciples: Andrew, Peter, and Philip (Jn 1:44; 12:21). Jesus announced that calamity would come upon Bethsaida because of its unbelief in spite of the mighty works he had done there (Mt 11:21-22; Lk 10:13). A blind man was healed in Bethsaida (Mk 8:22-26), and nearby over 5,000 people were fed by the miracle of the loaves and fish (Mk 6:34-45; Lk 9:10-17).<\/li>\n<p>Bethsaida is mentioned in several ancient sources, chiefly the writings of Josephus, a first-century <span>AD<\/span> Jewish historian. Two Bethsaidas, one on each side of the Sea of Galilee, were once postulated because the reference in Mark mentions the feeding of the 5,000 as happening across the lake from Bethsaida, whereas in Luke it seems to have taken place near Bethsaida. One solution is that the miracle occurred in the district surrounding Bethsaida, but that the quickest way to reach the city itself was to cross part of the lake. Such an interpretation questions the traditional location of the miracle (et-Tabgha on the west shore, nearer to Capernaum) but is preferable to the proposal of two Bethsaidas so close to each other.<\/p>\n<p>Bethsaida was merely a fishing village until it was enlarged and beautified by Philip the tetrarch (4 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 34), son of Herod the Great, after the death of Caesar Augustus. Philip was later buried there, according to Josephus. Bethsaida’s name was changed to Julias in honor of Julia, daughter of Augustus. That city was defended by Josephus when he was its military commander during the first Jewish revolt against Rome (<span>AD<\/span> 66–70).<\/p>\n<p>Josephus wrote that Bethsaida was “at the lake of Gennesareth” but “near to the Jordan River.” He also said that it was in lower Gaulanitis, a district that touched the northeast quarter of the Sea of Galilee. There is, however, no ancient “tell” or ruin fitting the size or description of the city near either the lake or the river. A suggestion that the small harbor of el-’Araj is the site of Bethsaida has little archaeological support, but et-Tell, located about two miles (3.2 kilometers) from the lake, shows evidence of extensive Roman occupation and building activity. At present, et-Tell seems to be the most satisfactory candidate for identification of Bethsaida.<\/p>\n<li>2. A variant name for the pool at Jerusalem, otherwise called Bethesda or Beth-zatha. <em>See<\/em> Bethesda; Beth-zatha.<\/li>","summary_ro":"BETHSAIDA 1. Town northeast of the Sea of Galilee. Bethsaida was the home of three of Jesus’ disciples: Andrew, Peter, and Philip (Jn 1:44; 12:21). Jesus announced that calamity would come upon Bethsaida because of its unbelief in spite of the mighty works he had done there (Mt 11:21-22; Lk 10:13). A blind man was healed in Bethsaida (Mk 8:22-26), and nearby over 5,000 people were fed by the miracle of the loaves and fish (Mk 6:34-45; Lk 9:10-17). Bethsaida is mentioned in several ancient sou...","summary_en":"BETHSAIDA 1. Town northeast of the Sea of Galilee. Bethsaida was the home of three of Jesus’ disciples: Andrew, Peter, and Philip (Jn 1:44; 12:21). Jesus announced that calamity would come upon Bethsaida because of its unbelief in spite of the mighty works he had done there (Mt 11:21-22; Lk 10:13). A blind man was healed in Bethsaida (Mk 8:22-26), and nearby over 5,000 people were fed by the miracle of the loaves and fish (Mk 6:34-45; Lk 9:10-17). Bethsaida is mentioned in several ancient sou...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":30002,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Peter, the Apostle","title_en":"Peter, the Apostle","content_ro":"<h3>PETER, <span>The Apostle<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>One of the 12 disciples; rose to prominence both among the disciples during Jesus’ ministry and among the apostles afterwards.<\/p>\n<p>There are actually four forms of Peter’s name in the New Testament: the Hebrew translated into Greek, “Simeon” to “Simon,” and the Aramaic translated into Greek, “Cephas” to “Petros” (meaning “rock”). His given name was Simeon bar-Jonah (Mt 16:17; cf. Jn 1:42), “Simon the son of John,” which was common Semitic nomenclature. It is most likely that “Simon” was not merely the Greek equivalent of “Simeon” but that, having his home in bilingual Galilee, “Simon” was the alternate form he used in dealings with Gentiles. In fact, it was quite common for a cosmopolitan Jew to employ three forms of his name depending on the occasion: Aramaic, Latin, and Greek. The double name “Simon Peter” (or “Simon called Peter”) demonstrates that the second name was a later addition, similar to “Jesus, the Christ.” The number of times that the Aramaic equivalent “Cephas” is used (once in John, four times each in Galatians and 1 Corinthians), as well as its translation into the Greek (not common with proper names), indicates the importance of the secondary name. Both Aramaic and Greek forms mean “the rock,” an obvious indication of Peter’s stature in the early church (see below on Mt 16:18). It is obvious that he was called “Simon” throughout Jesus’ ministry but came to be known as “Peter” more and more in the apostolic age.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Background<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Conversion and Call<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Place among the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>• Peter the Rock<\/p>\n<p>• Peter the Apostle<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Future Ministry<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersBackground\">Peter’s Background<\/p>\n<p>Peter was raised in bilingual Galilee. John 1:44 says that the home of Andrew (his brother) and Peter was Bethsaida, the whereabouts of which is difficult to place archaeologically. The only site about which we know is east of the Jordan in the district called Gaulanitis. Yet John 12:21 places Bethsaida in Galilee; however, it is possible that John is reflecting the popular use of the term “Galilee” rather than the legally correct one. Peter and Andrew had a fishing business centered in Capernaum (Mk 1:21, 29) and perhaps were partners with James and John (Lk 5:10). It is also likely that they intermittently continued in their business while disciples, as indicated in the fishing scene in John 21:1-8.<\/p>\n<p>One difficulty with this is the series of statements saying, “We have left all and followed You” (Mt 19:27; Mk 10:28; Lk 18:28, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The majority of interpreters have given this an absolute sense of “sold” or “left” their business. However, Luke 18:28 occurs in the context of leaving their homes but obviously is not meant in an absolute sense. It seems most likely that the disciples did leave the practice of their fishing businesses to follow Christ, but kept the tools of their trade and returned to their trades when necessary.<\/p>\n<p>They certainly did not abandon their families, as evidenced by Peter, who returned to his home at the end of each tour. The New Testament tells us that Peter was married. In Mark 1:29-31 Jesus heals his mother-in-law, who perhaps was living with Peter. In fact, it is possible that his home became Jesus’ headquarters in Galilee. (Matthew 8:14 may indicate that Jesus dwelt there.) First Corinthians 9:5 says that Peter, along with the other married apostles, often took his wife with him on his missionary journeys. Later tradition speaks of his children (Clement of Alexandria’s <em>Stromateis<\/em> 2.6.52) and says that Peter was present at the martyrdom of his wife (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 3.30.2).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersConversionandCall\">Peter’s Conversion and Call<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s brother, Andrew, was a disciple of John the Baptist, according to John 1:35-40. This follows the witness of John in 1:29-34 and is the second stage of John’s discipleship drama in chapter one—i.e., after bearing witness he now sends his own followers to Jesus. Andrew and the unnamed disciple (perhaps Philip as in Jn 1:43 or the “beloved disciple,” whom many identify with John himself) then “follow” Jesus (a term used often in John for discipleship). The next day Andrew follows the Baptist’s example and finds his brother Simon, saying, “We have found the Messiah” (Jn 1:41, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Peter’s conversion is presupposed in John 1:42, where Simon is brought to Jesus by Andrew and there given a new name.<\/p>\n<p>There are three separate episodes in the Gospels in which Simon is called, and these overlap with three episodes in which he is given the name “Cephas” (“Peter,” which means “rock”) by Jesus. John locates the event in Judea where John the Baptist was baptizing. The synoptic Gospels have two different scenes. The first call takes place at the Sea of Galilee (Mk 1:16-20; Mt 4:18-22). Jesus is walking along the shore and sees Peter and Andrew along with James and John casting their nets into the sea. At this time he calls them to become “fishers of men.” Luke then expands this into a fishing scene (Lk 5:1-11), in which the disciples have fished all night and caught nothing but at the command of Jesus lower their nets and catch an amount of fish so great that the boat starts to sink. The episode concludes exactly like the Markan abbreviated form: Jesus says that from now on they will “catch men,” and as a result they leave everything and follow him.<\/p>\n<p>The second synoptic episode involving Peter’s call (and his new name) is the official choice of the Twelve upon the mountain (Mk 3:13-19 and parallels); in the list of the names we have “Simon he surnamed Peter.” The final occurrence dealing with Peter’s new name is found in Matthew 16:17-19, in connection with Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi.<\/p>\n<p>It is somewhat difficult to harmonize these episodes properly. Were there three different episodes in which Simon was called (Jn 1:42; Mk 1:20; 3:16) and three separate incidents in which he was given the name Cephas\/Peter (Jn 1:42; Mk 3:16; Mt 16:18)? It is attractive to a broad spectrum of academia to assume that one single event, which happened at some indeterminate time toward the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, was later expanded into these diverse traditions. However, a closer examination of the Gospel data does not necessitate such a conclusion. John 1:35-42 is not an institutional scene that connotes an official call. Rather, it describes the first encounter with Jesus and realization regarding his significance. The “renaming” is in the future tense and looks to a later event. Moreover, John deliberately omits most of the crisis events in Jesus’ life (the baptism, the choice of the Twelve, the Transfiguration, the words of institution at the Last Supper, Gethsemane) and replaces them with highly theological scenes that teach the spiritual significance of the events. This is what he has done here.<\/p>\n<p>The same is true of the first synoptic call, i.e., the fishing scene. Again, there is no hint of official ordination to office here but rather a proleptic or prophetic hint of future ministry. This is especially true of the highly theological scene in Luke, which promises abundant results. Again in all three accounts the future tense is employed: “I will make you fishers of men” (Matthew and Mark), “You will catch men” (Luke, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The call in Mark 1:20 and Matthew 4:21 and their reaction (leaving all behind and following Jesus) is the opening gambit that is finalized in the actual institutional scene in Mark 3:13-19 and parallels. The wording does not indicate that these two episodes are doublets, for the actual appointment of the disciples occurs in the second passage. We must differentiate between the original call to one segment (who became the so-called “inner circle” of the Twelve) and the final choice of all the disciples.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersPlaceamongtheTwelve\">Peter’s Place among the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>The prominence of Simon Peter in the Gospels and Acts cannot be disputed. While some have attempted to attribute this to his leadership role in the later church, there is no basis for that in the text of the NT. From the very beginning Simon attained preeminence above the others. In the lists of the Twelve just mentioned, Simon’s name always appears first, and in Matthew 10:2 it introduces his name as “the first.” Moreover, the Twelve are often designated “Peter and those with him” (Mk 1:36; Lk 9:32; 8:45, <span>nkjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Throughout the accounts Peter acted and spoke on behalf of the other disciples. At the Transfiguration it is Peter who wanted to erect tents (Mk 9:5), and he alone had sufficient faith to attempt walking on the water (Mt 14:28-31). It is Peter who asks the Lord to explain his teaching on forgiveness (Mt 18:21) and parables (Mt 15:15; Lk 12:41) and who speaks the disciples’ minds in Matthew 19:27, “Behold, we have left everything and followed you; what’s in it for us?” (paraphrased). The collectors of the temple tax come to Peter as leader of the group (Mt 17:24). As a member of the inner circle (with James and John, possibly Andrew in Mk 13:3) he was often alone with Jesus (at the raising of Jairus’s daughter, Mk 5:37 and parallels; at the Transfiguration, Mk 9:2 and parallels; at Gethsemane, Mk 14:33 and Mt 26:37). Jesus asks Peter and John to prepare the Passover meal in Luke 22:8, and in Mark 14:37 (and Mt 26:40) he directs his rebuke to Peter as representing the others (“Could ye not watch with me one hour?”). Finally, the message of the angel at the tomb as recorded in Mark 16:7 said, “Go your way, tell his disciples and Peter.” Certainly Peter held a very special place among the Twelve.<\/p>\n<p>This was especially evident in the Caesarea Philippi episode (Mk 8:27-33 and parallels). It was Peter whose confession became the high point of the Gospel accounts, “Thou art the Christ” (Luke adds “of God”; Matthew, “the Son of the living God”). After Jesus then spoke of the suffering of the Son of Man, Peter rebuked him, and in Mark’s description Jesus then turned, gazed at all the disciples, and said to Peter, “Get thee behind me, Satan: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but the things that be of men” (v 33, <span>kjv<\/span>). This was obviously directed at them all through Peter.<\/p>\n<p>The portrait of Peter that comes through all four accounts pictures him as impulsive, often rash; he is the first to act and speak his mind and was typified by his enthusiasm for everything in which he had a part. At the sight of Jesus walking on the water, Peter asked that the Lord command him to do the same and then immediately leaped out of the boat and began doing just that. At the Transfiguration, while the others were awed into silence by the appearance of Moses and Elijah, Peter the man of action said, “If thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles” (Mt 17:4, <span>kjv<\/span>). Mark and Luke both add here that Peter did not know what he was saying. Peter’s unguarded and unthinking tendency to protest Jesus’ statements is seen not only at Caesarea Philippi but also at the foot-washing scene in John 13:4-11 when he said first, “You shall never ever wash my feet”; and then after Jesus’ strong retort, “If I do not wash you, you have no part with Me,” he reversed himself completely, stating, “Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and head” (13:8-9, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Finally, in the account of the race to the tomb (Jn 20:2-10), the beloved disciple, reaching the tomb first, paused while Peter immediately and impulsively entered it. Peter was certainly one who “rushed in where angels fear to tread.” However, this very trait aligns him with all of us and may be one of the major reasons why he becomes the representative disciple throughout the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetertheRock\">Peter the Rock<\/p>\n<p>The key to the significance of Simon Peter is obviously the controversial addendum to the Caesarea Philippi episode, found only in Matthew 16:17-19, Jesus’ testimonial to Peter. There are several crucial aspects of this saying. The most important for this study is verse 18, “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church” (<span>kjv<\/span>). There have been many interpretations of this down through history: (1) It refers to Peter as the “rock” or first bishop of the church. This was the Roman Catholic interpretation from the third century on and was employed as a prooftext for apostolic succession, but it is not hinted at anywhere in the context or even in the epistles: it was not a first-century concept. (2) The majority of Protestants since the Reformation have taken this to be a reference to Peter’s statement of faith rather than to Peter himself; but this neglects the wordplay, which is even more pronounced in Aramaic, which has only one form for “Cephas” (rock). (3) An alternative has been to take “this rock” as a reference to Jesus himself, but that is fanciful and is hardly in the context. In conclusion, “this rock” is almost certainly a reference to Peter, but it must be understood in two ways. First, Peter was to become the foundation upon which Christ would build his church, a position clearly attested to in Acts. This does not mean that Peter had an authority above the other apostles. Paul’s rebuke of Peter in Galatians 2:11-14 demonstrates that he was not above them, and at the Jerusalem council in Acts 15 it is James who has the position of leadership. Second, Peter is seen here not merely as an individual but as the representative of the disciples. This view is coming to increasing prominence today. It recognized the Jewish concept of “corporate identity” in which the leader was identified with the corporate body (e.g., the king or high priest representing the nation before God). This concept is also in keeping with Matthew 18:18-20, which passes on the same authority to the church as is here given to Peter. In this view Peter as the rock becomes the first of the building blocks upon which Christ, the chief cornerstone (to continue the metaphor), will build his church (see Eph 2:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>Two other aspects are worthy of note here. First, verse 18 says, “the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” The “gates of hell” is a common Jewish euphemism for death’s inevitable and irrevocable power. Jesus is saying that Satan will not be triumphant over the church, and his sphere of operations, death, will be defeated (cf. 1 Cor 15:26, 54-55). The church would undergo persecution and martyrdom, but the church would be triumphant.<\/p>\n<p>Second, verse 19 promises, “I will give unto thee [singular] the keys of the kingdom,” another statement used of apostolic succession by the medieval church. Again, this must be understood in light of corporate identity; Peter, as the preeminent figure in the early church, here embodies the community in his leadership. The “keys of the kingdom” are in direct contrast to the “gates of hell” (cf. Rv 1:18, “the keys of hell and death” and Rv 3:7, the “key of David”), and this follows the imagery of the building seen in the rock upon which Christ will build his church. Here Peter is given the keys that will unlock the power of the kingdom in building God’s community, the church. The future tense (“will give”) undoubtedly points to the postresurrection period, when that power was unleashed and the church erected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetertheApostle\">Peter the Apostle<\/p>\n<p>Two events led to the new Peter who fills the pages of Acts: his reinstatement described in John 21:15-17 and the resurrection appearance of the Lord, which is never described but alluded to in Luke 24:34 and 1 Corinthians 15:5. His denial was certainly proof that he was not yet able to assume his predicted position as the rock of the church. Both Luke and Paul seem to state that the risen Lord appeared to Simon Peter before the others, which would be fitting in light of his preeminence in the early church. During the Palestinian era, the fifteen-year period prior to the Gentile mission, Peter was the leading figure. The others mentioned in Acts 1–12 are all secondary to Peter, the dominant director of church policy. These include John, who is with Peter in the temple (3:1), the prison (4:13), and Samaria (8:14); Stephen, who was one of the Seven and whose revolutionary preaching led to his martyrdom (chs 6–7); Philip, another of the Seven who proclaimed the gospel in Samaria and to the Ethiopian eunuch (ch 8); Barnabas, who set an example of communal sharing (4:36-37) and was an official delegate to Antioch (11:20-30); Paul, a miraculous convert and witness (9:1-30; 11:25-30; 12:25); and James, who became the first apostolic martyr (12:2). It is Peter who proposes the choice of the 12th disciple (1:15-17), who proclaims the gospel at Pentecost (2:14-40), who utters the healing word (3:6), and who defends the gospel before the Sanhedrin (4:8-12, 19-20; 5:29-32). The episode regarding Ananias and Sapphira is particularly poignant, for here Peter functions as the avenging messenger of God; nowhere is his authority more evident. We would also note his authority in the scene at Samaria concerning the attempt of Simon the Sorcerer to buy the charismatic power (8:18-24). Again, it is Peter whose influence commands the situation. In these two incidents we certainly see the “binding and loosing” jurisdiction (cf. Mt 16:19) exhibited in Peter.<\/p>\n<p>Yet Peter and the church still came under the strictures of their Jewish heritage. The evidence points to a Jewish proselyte self-consciousness on the part of the early church. They viewed themselves as the righteous remnant, living in the age of Messianic fulfillment, but still interpreted themselves in a Jewish sense and conducted their evangelism in the proselyte form of Jewish particularism (i.e., Gentiles could only be converted through Judaism). Two events altered this. First, the Hellenistic Jewish branch of the church rebelled against the Hebrew Christians, which resulted in the appointment of the seven deacons and a change in the orthodox policy of the Palestinian church. Second, this then led to a new preaching ministry, first by Stephen, whose insights ended in his martyrdom and the dispersal of the Hellenistic branch in chapter 8; then by Philip and others, who extended the gospel even further, to the Samaritans and God-fearers. As a further result, Peter and John came to Samaria (8:14), the next significant step toward the Gentile mission. Thus ended the centrality of Jerusalem in the unfolding story.<\/p>\n<p>The two miracles of Peter, at Lydda (the paralytic) and Joppa (raising the dead woman) in Acts 9:32-42, are probably intended to parallel similar miracles of Jesus in Luke’s first work (Lk 5:18-26; 8:49-56). This is part of a major theme in Acts whereby Jesus’ life and ministry are paralleled and continued in the work of the Spirit through the church. Again Peter is seen in a representative role.<\/p>\n<p>The new relationships are extended in two further scenes. First, Peter stays with “Simon, a tanner,” in Joppa, an unclean trade; no pious Jew would knowingly have social contact with such a one. Even more important, God teaches Peter through a dream (10:10-16) that the old dichotomy between clean and unclean has been broken. This then leads Peter to the home of an uncircumcised Gentile, the most serious social taboo for the Jew, and subsequent events force Peter to admit Gentiles into the church without the necessity of Jewish proselyte requirements. The serious consequences of this are seen in the debate that ensued in Jerusalem (Acts 11:2-3) and later at the council (Acts 15:1-21). The centrality of this event is demonstrated in the extent to which Luke reproduces Peter’s speech, which seems to be a repetition of chapter 10 but is meant to highlight this crucial episode. Often forgotten in the significance of this for the early church is the fact that for Luke the Gentile mission begins with Peter, not Paul. He is the one upon whom the salvific act of God descends; and as the leader of the church, he was the first important witness to it.<\/p>\n<p>The persecution of Herod Agrippa (Acts 12:1-4) was likely due to the furor caused by this free intercourse with Gentiles; and it ended the period of Peter’s leadership in Jerusalem. The Jewish people were greatly offended by the new Christian push; and according to Luke in Acts, the idyllic period of popularity, in which the common people supported the church, effectively ceased at this time. Peter’s miraculous release and the dramatic scene at Mary’s house typified the special place of Peter, but the momentum shifts. Peter is forced to flee Jerusalem, and in the interim James arises to leadership (Acts 12:17); at the Jerusalem council it is the latter who has the chair and presents the council’s decision (Acts 15:6-29).<\/p>\n<p>The exact relationship between Peter and the other disciples, especially with the so-called pillars—James and John—and the apostle Paul, cannot be ascertained. The evidence is too vague. Many have thought that indeed there were no truly universal leaders, for the early church was too diverse. However, that is unlikely, and Luke’s portrayal in Acts parallels Paul’s statement in Galatians 2:8 that Peter was the apostle par excellence to the “circumcised” and Paul to the “Gentiles.” They were the universal leaders, while James became the local leader of the Jerusalem eldership. However, neither Peter nor Paul had dominical status similar to that of later popes (i.e., neither was the absolute spokesman of the church and above criticism). So-called emissaries from James could have such an influence on Peter that he would hypocritically change his behavior before Gentiles (Gal 2:12), and Paul could rebuke Peter publicly for doing so (Gal 2:11-14). Paul never claimed authority over the other disciples and even sought their approval and “the right hands of fellowship” for his ministry to the Gentiles (Gal 2:1-10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersFutureMinistry\">Peter’s Future Ministry<\/p>\n<p>We have very little hard evidence for Peter’s other movements. It seems as though Peter gradually turned from leadership to missionary work. However, this is an oversimplification. It is most likely that, following the similar pattern of Paul, he combined the two. The presence of a “Cephas party” at Corinth (1 Cor 1:12; 3:22) may indicate that Peter had spent some time there. This is made even more likely when Paul uses Peter as the main example for taking one’s wife on missionary expeditions (1 Cor 9:5). The “Cephas party” probably consisted of those who were converted under his ministry; it is probable that they were Jewish Christians and opposed the “Paul party” on Jewish-Gentile debates reflected elsewhere in 1 Corinthians.<\/p>\n<p>The First Epistle of Peter was sent to churches in northern Asia Minor—the provinces of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia. The problem here is that there is no hint that Peter had been there and no personal notations in the epistle to demonstrate his acquaintance with these churches. However, it does show that he was very interested in them. In fact, some believe that the reason why Paul was not allowed into this district according to Acts 16:7-8 was that Peter was already ministering there. In short, the question of Peter’s involvement in Asia Minor must remain an open one.<\/p>\n<p>There is no final NT evidence that Peter went to Rome. First Peter 5:13 says that the epistle was sent from “Babylon,” and it is doubtful that this was the literal Babylon, because there is no tradition that Peter ever went there, and Babylon was sparsely populated back then. It is probably a cryptic symbol for Rome, the “Babylon of the West.” It is most likely that the “Babylon” of Revelation 14:8 and 16:19 is also a symbol of Rome. This would fit the strong tradition in the early church that indeed Peter did minister there.<\/p>\n<p>There are four early external witnesses concerning Peter’s death. John 21:18 mentions only the martyrdom of Peter but does not give any hint as to the place. First Clement was written at the end of the first century and reports the martyrdom of Peter and Paul among others. While 1 Clement 5:4 testifies only to the fact and not the place of Peter’s martyrdom, a study of two aspects favors Rome—the reference to a “great multitude” of martyrdoms, which best fits the Neronian persecution, and the phrase “glorious example among us,” which shows that the people of Clement’s own church (Rome) were involved. Ignatius’s letter to the Romans (4:3) also testifies generally to the martyrdom of Peter and Paul, and again the context favors Rome as the place. He says, “I did not command you as did Peter and Paul,” which shows that they had ministries in Rome. The Ascension of Isaiah 4:2-3, a Jewish Christian work of the same period, speaks of Beliar (probably Nero) who martyrs “one of the Twelve,” almost certainly Peter. Therefore the earliest evidence does not explicitly point to Rome as the place of Peter’s death, but that is the most likely hypothesis.<\/p>\n<p>Definite statements to that effect appear toward the end of the second century. Dionysius, bishop of Corinth, in a letter dated c. 170 (preserved in Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 2.25.8) says that Peter and Paul taught together in Italy. At the end of that century Irenaeus says (in <em>Against Heresies<\/em> 2.1-3) that Peter and Paul preached in Rome, and Tertullian in the same general period adds that Peter was martyred “like . . . the Lord” (<em>Scorpiace<\/em> 15). Clement of Alexandria and Origen both allude to Peter’s presence in Rome, and the latter adds the belief that he was “crucified head-downwards” (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 2.15.2; 3.1.2). The tradition that Peter was crucified may be supported in John 21:18: “when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall . . . carry thee wither thou wouldest not” (<span>kjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The fact that Paul’s Epistle to the Romans (c. 55–57) does not mention Peter tells us that he could not have gone there earlier than that. If 1 Peter was written during the Neronian persecution, as those who hold to Petrine authorship believe, he must have gone there sometime in the late 50s or early 60s. Of course, the extent of his ministry in Rome also cannot be known. Some indeed have posited that he had little or no extensive stay in Rome. The facts, as they can be recovered, point to certain tentative conclusions. Peter did have some type of ministry in Rome, though the extent of it cannot be known. However, it is doubtful, in light of the early testimony to his preaching ministry there, that he was merely passing through Rome when caught in Nero’s pogrom. Therefore he most likely spent the last years of his ministry in Rome and there suffered martyrdom under Nero, perhaps by crucifixion.<\/p>\n<p>Simon Peter, along with Paul, was the leading figure in the early church. His impact has been tragically dimmed by the acrimonious debates of Roman Catholic– Protestant circles, but the biblical evidence is clear. He was the leading disciple of Jesus and indeed the “rock” who provided the foundation for the church. As the representative disciple, his enthusiasm and even his weaknesses have made him the supreme example of the developing disciple, one who, through the power of the risen Lord, rose above his faults to become a towering figure on the church scene.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PETER, <span>The Apostle<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>One of the 12 disciples; rose to prominence both among the disciples during Jesus’ ministry and among the apostles afterwards.<\/p>\n<p>There are actually four forms of Peter’s name in the New Testament: the Hebrew translated into Greek, “Simeon” to “Simon,” and the Aramaic translated into Greek, “Cephas” to “Petros” (meaning “rock”). His given name was Simeon bar-Jonah (Mt 16:17; cf. Jn 1:42), “Simon the son of John,” which was common Semitic nomenclature. It is most likely that “Simon” was not merely the Greek equivalent of “Simeon” but that, having his home in bilingual Galilee, “Simon” was the alternate form he used in dealings with Gentiles. In fact, it was quite common for a cosmopolitan Jew to employ three forms of his name depending on the occasion: Aramaic, Latin, and Greek. The double name “Simon Peter” (or “Simon called Peter”) demonstrates that the second name was a later addition, similar to “Jesus, the Christ.” The number of times that the Aramaic equivalent “Cephas” is used (once in John, four times each in Galatians and 1 Corinthians), as well as its translation into the Greek (not common with proper names), indicates the importance of the secondary name. Both Aramaic and Greek forms mean “the rock,” an obvious indication of Peter’s stature in the early church (see below on Mt 16:18). It is obvious that he was called “Simon” throughout Jesus’ ministry but came to be known as “Peter” more and more in the apostolic age.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Background<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Conversion and Call<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Place among the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>• Peter the Rock<\/p>\n<p>• Peter the Apostle<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Future Ministry<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersBackground\">Peter’s Background<\/p>\n<p>Peter was raised in bilingual Galilee. John 1:44 says that the home of Andrew (his brother) and Peter was Bethsaida, the whereabouts of which is difficult to place archaeologically. The only site about which we know is east of the Jordan in the district called Gaulanitis. Yet John 12:21 places Bethsaida in Galilee; however, it is possible that John is reflecting the popular use of the term “Galilee” rather than the legally correct one. Peter and Andrew had a fishing business centered in Capernaum (Mk 1:21, 29) and perhaps were partners with James and John (Lk 5:10). It is also likely that they intermittently continued in their business while disciples, as indicated in the fishing scene in John 21:1-8.<\/p>\n<p>One difficulty with this is the series of statements saying, “We have left all and followed You” (Mt 19:27; Mk 10:28; Lk 18:28, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The majority of interpreters have given this an absolute sense of “sold” or “left” their business. However, Luke 18:28 occurs in the context of leaving their homes but obviously is not meant in an absolute sense. It seems most likely that the disciples did leave the practice of their fishing businesses to follow Christ, but kept the tools of their trade and returned to their trades when necessary.<\/p>\n<p>They certainly did not abandon their families, as evidenced by Peter, who returned to his home at the end of each tour. The New Testament tells us that Peter was married. In Mark 1:29-31 Jesus heals his mother-in-law, who perhaps was living with Peter. In fact, it is possible that his home became Jesus’ headquarters in Galilee. (Matthew 8:14 may indicate that Jesus dwelt there.) First Corinthians 9:5 says that Peter, along with the other married apostles, often took his wife with him on his missionary journeys. Later tradition speaks of his children (Clement of Alexandria’s <em>Stromateis<\/em> 2.6.52) and says that Peter was present at the martyrdom of his wife (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 3.30.2).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersConversionandCall\">Peter’s Conversion and Call<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s brother, Andrew, was a disciple of John the Baptist, according to John 1:35-40. This follows the witness of John in 1:29-34 and is the second stage of John’s discipleship drama in chapter one—i.e., after bearing witness he now sends his own followers to Jesus. Andrew and the unnamed disciple (perhaps Philip as in Jn 1:43 or the “beloved disciple,” whom many identify with John himself) then “follow” Jesus (a term used often in John for discipleship). The next day Andrew follows the Baptist’s example and finds his brother Simon, saying, “We have found the Messiah” (Jn 1:41, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Peter’s conversion is presupposed in John 1:42, where Simon is brought to Jesus by Andrew and there given a new name.<\/p>\n<p>There are three separate episodes in the Gospels in which Simon is called, and these overlap with three episodes in which he is given the name “Cephas” (“Peter,” which means “rock”) by Jesus. John locates the event in Judea where John the Baptist was baptizing. The synoptic Gospels have two different scenes. The first call takes place at the Sea of Galilee (Mk 1:16-20; Mt 4:18-22). Jesus is walking along the shore and sees Peter and Andrew along with James and John casting their nets into the sea. At this time he calls them to become “fishers of men.” Luke then expands this into a fishing scene (Lk 5:1-11), in which the disciples have fished all night and caught nothing but at the command of Jesus lower their nets and catch an amount of fish so great that the boat starts to sink. The episode concludes exactly like the Markan abbreviated form: Jesus says that from now on they will “catch men,” and as a result they leave everything and follow him.<\/p>\n<p>The second synoptic episode involving Peter’s call (and his new name) is the official choice of the Twelve upon the mountain (Mk 3:13-19 and parallels); in the list of the names we have “Simon he surnamed Peter.” The final occurrence dealing with Peter’s new name is found in Matthew 16:17-19, in connection with Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi.<\/p>\n<p>It is somewhat difficult to harmonize these episodes properly. Were there three different episodes in which Simon was called (Jn 1:42; Mk 1:20; 3:16) and three separate incidents in which he was given the name Cephas\/Peter (Jn 1:42; Mk 3:16; Mt 16:18)? It is attractive to a broad spectrum of academia to assume that one single event, which happened at some indeterminate time toward the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, was later expanded into these diverse traditions. However, a closer examination of the Gospel data does not necessitate such a conclusion. John 1:35-42 is not an institutional scene that connotes an official call. Rather, it describes the first encounter with Jesus and realization regarding his significance. The “renaming” is in the future tense and looks to a later event. Moreover, John deliberately omits most of the crisis events in Jesus’ life (the baptism, the choice of the Twelve, the Transfiguration, the words of institution at the Last Supper, Gethsemane) and replaces them with highly theological scenes that teach the spiritual significance of the events. This is what he has done here.<\/p>\n<p>The same is true of the first synoptic call, i.e., the fishing scene. Again, there is no hint of official ordination to office here but rather a proleptic or prophetic hint of future ministry. This is especially true of the highly theological scene in Luke, which promises abundant results. Again in all three accounts the future tense is employed: “I will make you fishers of men” (Matthew and Mark), “You will catch men” (Luke, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The call in Mark 1:20 and Matthew 4:21 and their reaction (leaving all behind and following Jesus) is the opening gambit that is finalized in the actual institutional scene in Mark 3:13-19 and parallels. The wording does not indicate that these two episodes are doublets, for the actual appointment of the disciples occurs in the second passage. We must differentiate between the original call to one segment (who became the so-called “inner circle” of the Twelve) and the final choice of all the disciples.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersPlaceamongtheTwelve\">Peter’s Place among the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>The prominence of Simon Peter in the Gospels and Acts cannot be disputed. While some have attempted to attribute this to his leadership role in the later church, there is no basis for that in the text of the NT. From the very beginning Simon attained preeminence above the others. In the lists of the Twelve just mentioned, Simon’s name always appears first, and in Matthew 10:2 it introduces his name as “the first.” Moreover, the Twelve are often designated “Peter and those with him” (Mk 1:36; Lk 9:32; 8:45, <span>nkjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Throughout the accounts Peter acted and spoke on behalf of the other disciples. At the Transfiguration it is Peter who wanted to erect tents (Mk 9:5), and he alone had sufficient faith to attempt walking on the water (Mt 14:28-31). It is Peter who asks the Lord to explain his teaching on forgiveness (Mt 18:21) and parables (Mt 15:15; Lk 12:41) and who speaks the disciples’ minds in Matthew 19:27, “Behold, we have left everything and followed you; what’s in it for us?” (paraphrased). The collectors of the temple tax come to Peter as leader of the group (Mt 17:24). As a member of the inner circle (with James and John, possibly Andrew in Mk 13:3) he was often alone with Jesus (at the raising of Jairus’s daughter, Mk 5:37 and parallels; at the Transfiguration, Mk 9:2 and parallels; at Gethsemane, Mk 14:33 and Mt 26:37). Jesus asks Peter and John to prepare the Passover meal in Luke 22:8, and in Mark 14:37 (and Mt 26:40) he directs his rebuke to Peter as representing the others (“Could ye not watch with me one hour?”). Finally, the message of the angel at the tomb as recorded in Mark 16:7 said, “Go your way, tell his disciples and Peter.” Certainly Peter held a very special place among the Twelve.<\/p>\n<p>This was especially evident in the Caesarea Philippi episode (Mk 8:27-33 and parallels). It was Peter whose confession became the high point of the Gospel accounts, “Thou art the Christ” (Luke adds “of God”; Matthew, “the Son of the living God”). After Jesus then spoke of the suffering of the Son of Man, Peter rebuked him, and in Mark’s description Jesus then turned, gazed at all the disciples, and said to Peter, “Get thee behind me, Satan: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but the things that be of men” (v 33, <span>kjv<\/span>). This was obviously directed at them all through Peter.<\/p>\n<p>The portrait of Peter that comes through all four accounts pictures him as impulsive, often rash; he is the first to act and speak his mind and was typified by his enthusiasm for everything in which he had a part. At the sight of Jesus walking on the water, Peter asked that the Lord command him to do the same and then immediately leaped out of the boat and began doing just that. At the Transfiguration, while the others were awed into silence by the appearance of Moses and Elijah, Peter the man of action said, “If thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles” (Mt 17:4, <span>kjv<\/span>). Mark and Luke both add here that Peter did not know what he was saying. Peter’s unguarded and unthinking tendency to protest Jesus’ statements is seen not only at Caesarea Philippi but also at the foot-washing scene in John 13:4-11 when he said first, “You shall never ever wash my feet”; and then after Jesus’ strong retort, “If I do not wash you, you have no part with Me,” he reversed himself completely, stating, “Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and head” (13:8-9, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Finally, in the account of the race to the tomb (Jn 20:2-10), the beloved disciple, reaching the tomb first, paused while Peter immediately and impulsively entered it. Peter was certainly one who “rushed in where angels fear to tread.” However, this very trait aligns him with all of us and may be one of the major reasons why he becomes the representative disciple throughout the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetertheRock\">Peter the Rock<\/p>\n<p>The key to the significance of Simon Peter is obviously the controversial addendum to the Caesarea Philippi episode, found only in Matthew 16:17-19, Jesus’ testimonial to Peter. There are several crucial aspects of this saying. The most important for this study is verse 18, “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church” (<span>kjv<\/span>). There have been many interpretations of this down through history: (1) It refers to Peter as the “rock” or first bishop of the church. This was the Roman Catholic interpretation from the third century on and was employed as a prooftext for apostolic succession, but it is not hinted at anywhere in the context or even in the epistles: it was not a first-century concept. (2) The majority of Protestants since the Reformation have taken this to be a reference to Peter’s statement of faith rather than to Peter himself; but this neglects the wordplay, which is even more pronounced in Aramaic, which has only one form for “Cephas” (rock). (3) An alternative has been to take “this rock” as a reference to Jesus himself, but that is fanciful and is hardly in the context. In conclusion, “this rock” is almost certainly a reference to Peter, but it must be understood in two ways. First, Peter was to become the foundation upon which Christ would build his church, a position clearly attested to in Acts. This does not mean that Peter had an authority above the other apostles. Paul’s rebuke of Peter in Galatians 2:11-14 demonstrates that he was not above them, and at the Jerusalem council in Acts 15 it is James who has the position of leadership. Second, Peter is seen here not merely as an individual but as the representative of the disciples. This view is coming to increasing prominence today. It recognized the Jewish concept of “corporate identity” in which the leader was identified with the corporate body (e.g., the king or high priest representing the nation before God). This concept is also in keeping with Matthew 18:18-20, which passes on the same authority to the church as is here given to Peter. In this view Peter as the rock becomes the first of the building blocks upon which Christ, the chief cornerstone (to continue the metaphor), will build his church (see Eph 2:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>Two other aspects are worthy of note here. First, verse 18 says, “the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” The “gates of hell” is a common Jewish euphemism for death’s inevitable and irrevocable power. Jesus is saying that Satan will not be triumphant over the church, and his sphere of operations, death, will be defeated (cf. 1 Cor 15:26, 54-55). The church would undergo persecution and martyrdom, but the church would be triumphant.<\/p>\n<p>Second, verse 19 promises, “I will give unto thee [singular] the keys of the kingdom,” another statement used of apostolic succession by the medieval church. Again, this must be understood in light of corporate identity; Peter, as the preeminent figure in the early church, here embodies the community in his leadership. The “keys of the kingdom” are in direct contrast to the “gates of hell” (cf. Rv 1:18, “the keys of hell and death” and Rv 3:7, the “key of David”), and this follows the imagery of the building seen in the rock upon which Christ will build his church. Here Peter is given the keys that will unlock the power of the kingdom in building God’s community, the church. The future tense (“will give”) undoubtedly points to the postresurrection period, when that power was unleashed and the church erected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetertheApostle\">Peter the Apostle<\/p>\n<p>Two events led to the new Peter who fills the pages of Acts: his reinstatement described in John 21:15-17 and the resurrection appearance of the Lord, which is never described but alluded to in Luke 24:34 and 1 Corinthians 15:5. His denial was certainly proof that he was not yet able to assume his predicted position as the rock of the church. Both Luke and Paul seem to state that the risen Lord appeared to Simon Peter before the others, which would be fitting in light of his preeminence in the early church. During the Palestinian era, the fifteen-year period prior to the Gentile mission, Peter was the leading figure. The others mentioned in Acts 1–12 are all secondary to Peter, the dominant director of church policy. These include John, who is with Peter in the temple (3:1), the prison (4:13), and Samaria (8:14); Stephen, who was one of the Seven and whose revolutionary preaching led to his martyrdom (chs 6–7); Philip, another of the Seven who proclaimed the gospel in Samaria and to the Ethiopian eunuch (ch 8); Barnabas, who set an example of communal sharing (4:36-37) and was an official delegate to Antioch (11:20-30); Paul, a miraculous convert and witness (9:1-30; 11:25-30; 12:25); and James, who became the first apostolic martyr (12:2). It is Peter who proposes the choice of the 12th disciple (1:15-17), who proclaims the gospel at Pentecost (2:14-40), who utters the healing word (3:6), and who defends the gospel before the Sanhedrin (4:8-12, 19-20; 5:29-32). The episode regarding Ananias and Sapphira is particularly poignant, for here Peter functions as the avenging messenger of God; nowhere is his authority more evident. We would also note his authority in the scene at Samaria concerning the attempt of Simon the Sorcerer to buy the charismatic power (8:18-24). Again, it is Peter whose influence commands the situation. In these two incidents we certainly see the “binding and loosing” jurisdiction (cf. Mt 16:19) exhibited in Peter.<\/p>\n<p>Yet Peter and the church still came under the strictures of their Jewish heritage. The evidence points to a Jewish proselyte self-consciousness on the part of the early church. They viewed themselves as the righteous remnant, living in the age of Messianic fulfillment, but still interpreted themselves in a Jewish sense and conducted their evangelism in the proselyte form of Jewish particularism (i.e., Gentiles could only be converted through Judaism). Two events altered this. First, the Hellenistic Jewish branch of the church rebelled against the Hebrew Christians, which resulted in the appointment of the seven deacons and a change in the orthodox policy of the Palestinian church. Second, this then led to a new preaching ministry, first by Stephen, whose insights ended in his martyrdom and the dispersal of the Hellenistic branch in chapter 8; then by Philip and others, who extended the gospel even further, to the Samaritans and God-fearers. As a further result, Peter and John came to Samaria (8:14), the next significant step toward the Gentile mission. Thus ended the centrality of Jerusalem in the unfolding story.<\/p>\n<p>The two miracles of Peter, at Lydda (the paralytic) and Joppa (raising the dead woman) in Acts 9:32-42, are probably intended to parallel similar miracles of Jesus in Luke’s first work (Lk 5:18-26; 8:49-56). This is part of a major theme in Acts whereby Jesus’ life and ministry are paralleled and continued in the work of the Spirit through the church. Again Peter is seen in a representative role.<\/p>\n<p>The new relationships are extended in two further scenes. First, Peter stays with “Simon, a tanner,” in Joppa, an unclean trade; no pious Jew would knowingly have social contact with such a one. Even more important, God teaches Peter through a dream (10:10-16) that the old dichotomy between clean and unclean has been broken. This then leads Peter to the home of an uncircumcised Gentile, the most serious social taboo for the Jew, and subsequent events force Peter to admit Gentiles into the church without the necessity of Jewish proselyte requirements. The serious consequences of this are seen in the debate that ensued in Jerusalem (Acts 11:2-3) and later at the council (Acts 15:1-21). The centrality of this event is demonstrated in the extent to which Luke reproduces Peter’s speech, which seems to be a repetition of chapter 10 but is meant to highlight this crucial episode. Often forgotten in the significance of this for the early church is the fact that for Luke the Gentile mission begins with Peter, not Paul. He is the one upon whom the salvific act of God descends; and as the leader of the church, he was the first important witness to it.<\/p>\n<p>The persecution of Herod Agrippa (Acts 12:1-4) was likely due to the furor caused by this free intercourse with Gentiles; and it ended the period of Peter’s leadership in Jerusalem. The Jewish people were greatly offended by the new Christian push; and according to Luke in Acts, the idyllic period of popularity, in which the common people supported the church, effectively ceased at this time. Peter’s miraculous release and the dramatic scene at Mary’s house typified the special place of Peter, but the momentum shifts. Peter is forced to flee Jerusalem, and in the interim James arises to leadership (Acts 12:17); at the Jerusalem council it is the latter who has the chair and presents the council’s decision (Acts 15:6-29).<\/p>\n<p>The exact relationship between Peter and the other disciples, especially with the so-called pillars—James and John—and the apostle Paul, cannot be ascertained. The evidence is too vague. Many have thought that indeed there were no truly universal leaders, for the early church was too diverse. However, that is unlikely, and Luke’s portrayal in Acts parallels Paul’s statement in Galatians 2:8 that Peter was the apostle par excellence to the “circumcised” and Paul to the “Gentiles.” They were the universal leaders, while James became the local leader of the Jerusalem eldership. However, neither Peter nor Paul had dominical status similar to that of later popes (i.e., neither was the absolute spokesman of the church and above criticism). So-called emissaries from James could have such an influence on Peter that he would hypocritically change his behavior before Gentiles (Gal 2:12), and Paul could rebuke Peter publicly for doing so (Gal 2:11-14). Paul never claimed authority over the other disciples and even sought their approval and “the right hands of fellowship” for his ministry to the Gentiles (Gal 2:1-10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersFutureMinistry\">Peter’s Future Ministry<\/p>\n<p>We have very little hard evidence for Peter’s other movements. It seems as though Peter gradually turned from leadership to missionary work. However, this is an oversimplification. It is most likely that, following the similar pattern of Paul, he combined the two. The presence of a “Cephas party” at Corinth (1 Cor 1:12; 3:22) may indicate that Peter had spent some time there. This is made even more likely when Paul uses Peter as the main example for taking one’s wife on missionary expeditions (1 Cor 9:5). The “Cephas party” probably consisted of those who were converted under his ministry; it is probable that they were Jewish Christians and opposed the “Paul party” on Jewish-Gentile debates reflected elsewhere in 1 Corinthians.<\/p>\n<p>The First Epistle of Peter was sent to churches in northern Asia Minor—the provinces of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia. The problem here is that there is no hint that Peter had been there and no personal notations in the epistle to demonstrate his acquaintance with these churches. However, it does show that he was very interested in them. In fact, some believe that the reason why Paul was not allowed into this district according to Acts 16:7-8 was that Peter was already ministering there. In short, the question of Peter’s involvement in Asia Minor must remain an open one.<\/p>\n<p>There is no final NT evidence that Peter went to Rome. First Peter 5:13 says that the epistle was sent from “Babylon,” and it is doubtful that this was the literal Babylon, because there is no tradition that Peter ever went there, and Babylon was sparsely populated back then. It is probably a cryptic symbol for Rome, the “Babylon of the West.” It is most likely that the “Babylon” of Revelation 14:8 and 16:19 is also a symbol of Rome. This would fit the strong tradition in the early church that indeed Peter did minister there.<\/p>\n<p>There are four early external witnesses concerning Peter’s death. John 21:18 mentions only the martyrdom of Peter but does not give any hint as to the place. First Clement was written at the end of the first century and reports the martyrdom of Peter and Paul among others. While 1 Clement 5:4 testifies only to the fact and not the place of Peter’s martyrdom, a study of two aspects favors Rome—the reference to a “great multitude” of martyrdoms, which best fits the Neronian persecution, and the phrase “glorious example among us,” which shows that the people of Clement’s own church (Rome) were involved. Ignatius’s letter to the Romans (4:3) also testifies generally to the martyrdom of Peter and Paul, and again the context favors Rome as the place. He says, “I did not command you as did Peter and Paul,” which shows that they had ministries in Rome. The Ascension of Isaiah 4:2-3, a Jewish Christian work of the same period, speaks of Beliar (probably Nero) who martyrs “one of the Twelve,” almost certainly Peter. Therefore the earliest evidence does not explicitly point to Rome as the place of Peter’s death, but that is the most likely hypothesis.<\/p>\n<p>Definite statements to that effect appear toward the end of the second century. Dionysius, bishop of Corinth, in a letter dated c. 170 (preserved in Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 2.25.8) says that Peter and Paul taught together in Italy. At the end of that century Irenaeus says (in <em>Against Heresies<\/em> 2.1-3) that Peter and Paul preached in Rome, and Tertullian in the same general period adds that Peter was martyred “like . . . the Lord” (<em>Scorpiace<\/em> 15). Clement of Alexandria and Origen both allude to Peter’s presence in Rome, and the latter adds the belief that he was “crucified head-downwards” (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 2.15.2; 3.1.2). The tradition that Peter was crucified may be supported in John 21:18: “when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall . . . carry thee wither thou wouldest not” (<span>kjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The fact that Paul’s Epistle to the Romans (c. 55–57) does not mention Peter tells us that he could not have gone there earlier than that. If 1 Peter was written during the Neronian persecution, as those who hold to Petrine authorship believe, he must have gone there sometime in the late 50s or early 60s. Of course, the extent of his ministry in Rome also cannot be known. Some indeed have posited that he had little or no extensive stay in Rome. The facts, as they can be recovered, point to certain tentative conclusions. Peter did have some type of ministry in Rome, though the extent of it cannot be known. However, it is doubtful, in light of the early testimony to his preaching ministry there, that he was merely passing through Rome when caught in Nero’s pogrom. Therefore he most likely spent the last years of his ministry in Rome and there suffered martyrdom under Nero, perhaps by crucifixion.<\/p>\n<p>Simon Peter, along with Paul, was the leading figure in the early church. His impact has been tragically dimmed by the acrimonious debates of Roman Catholic– Protestant circles, but the biblical evidence is clear. He was the leading disciple of Jesus and indeed the “rock” who provided the foundation for the church. As the representative disciple, his enthusiasm and even his weaknesses have made him the supreme example of the developing disciple, one who, through the power of the risen Lord, rose above his faults to become a towering figure on the church scene.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PETER, The Apostle One of the 12 disciples; rose to prominence both among the disciples during Jesus’ ministry and among the apostles afterwards. There are actually four forms of Peter’s name in the New Testament: the Hebrew translated into Greek, “Simeon” to “Simon,” and the Aramaic translated into Greek, “Cephas” to “Petros” (meaning “rock”). His given name was Simeon bar-Jonah (Mt 16:17; cf. Jn 1:42), “Simon the son of John,” which was common Semitic nomenclature. It is most likely that “S...","summary_en":"PETER, The Apostle One of the 12 disciples; rose to prominence both among the disciples during Jesus’ ministry and among the apostles afterwards. There are actually four forms of Peter’s name in the New Testament: the Hebrew translated into Greek, “Simeon” to “Simon,” and the Aramaic translated into Greek, “Cephas” to “Petros” (meaning “rock”). His given name was Simeon bar-Jonah (Mt 16:17; cf. Jn 1:42), “Simon the son of John,” which was common Semitic nomenclature. It is most likely that “S...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":35438,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Simon","title_en":"Simon","content_ro":"<h3>SIMON<\/h3>\n<p>Greek form of a Hebrew\/Aramaic name meaning “God has heard.” Nine men in the NT had this name:<\/p>\n<p>1. Son of Jona (Mt 16:17) or John (Jn 1:42), Andrew’s brother (v 40), and surnamed Cephas and Peter (respectively Aramaic and Greek, for “rock,” v 42) by Jesus. A fisherman of Bethsaida (Mk 1:16; Jn 1:44), he became an apostle of Jesus and author of two NT letters bearing his name. <em>See<\/em> Peter, The Apostle.<\/p>\n<li>2. Brother of Jesus, named with other brothers, James, Joses or Joseph, and Judas (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3).<\/li>\n<li>3. Leper, perhaps cured by Jesus, in whose house at Bethany Jesus and his disciples were eating when a woman poured an alabaster flask of costly ointment on the Lord’s head. Over the disciples’ objections against the waste of what could have been sold to support the poor, Jesus commended the act as a wonderful thing (Mt 26:6-13; Mk 14:3-9). From John 12:1-8 it appears that Simon’s house was also the house of Mary, Martha, and Lazarus, but their relationship to Simon is uncertain.<\/li>\n<li>4. Man of Cyrene, a district of North Africa, whom the Romans forced to carry Jesus’ cross (Mt 27:32; Mk 15:21; Lk 23:26). He was the father of Alexander and Rufus (Mk 15:21; cf. Rom 16:13).<\/li>\n<li>5. Apostle of Jesus called a Zealot (Lk 6:15), presumably because of prior association either with the party of political extremists by that name, who adopted terrorism to oppose the Roman occupation of Palestine, or with one of a number of Jewish groups noted for their zeal for the law. In Matthew 10:4 and Mark 3:18 he is designated the “Cananaean” (<span>rsv<\/span>)—from the Aramaic word for “zealot.” He is mentioned again in Acts 1:13 as one of the 11 apostles in Jerusalem after Jesus’ ascension. Otherwise, the NT is silent about him.<\/li>\n<li>6. Pharisee whose treatment of Jesus evoked the parable of the two debtors (Lk 7:36-50). He invited Jesus to eat at his house but withheld courtesies customary for guests and disapproved of Jesus’ acceptance of a “sinner” woman who wet the Lord’s feet with her tears, dried them with her hair, and anointed them with ointment from an alabaster flask. Jesus’ parable contrasted the woman’s act of loving and repentant faith with Simon’s unloving and self-righteous skepticism.<\/li>\n<li>7. Father of Judas Iscariot, the disciple who betrayed Jesus in Gethsemane (Jn 6:71; 13:2, 26).<\/li>\n<li>8. Magician (often called Simon Magus) of great repute in Samaria. Impressed by the signs and miracles performed by Philip the deacon-become-evangelist, he joined the crowd of baptized believers. He offered Peter and John money in exchange for the gift of the Holy Spirit, provoking Peter’s emphatic rebuke (Acts 8:9-24). From the association of this incident with his name, the English word “simony” is derived; it denotes the sale or purchase of church positions, or any profiteering from sacred things.<\/li>\n<li>9. Tanner of Joppa. Peter lodged at his house for many days (Acts 9:43; 10:6, 17, 32). On Simon’s housetop, Peter experienced the vision of a great sheet let down from heaven, containing animals and birds prohibited as food in Jewish law (10:15). Peter later recognized this vision as his preparation for consenting to preach the gospel to the Gentiles (vv 28-29).<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>SIMON<\/h3>\n<p>Greek form of a Hebrew\/Aramaic name meaning “God has heard.” Nine men in the NT had this name:<\/p>\n<p>1. Son of Jona (Mt 16:17) or John (Jn 1:42), Andrew’s brother (v 40), and surnamed Cephas and Peter (respectively Aramaic and Greek, for “rock,” v 42) by Jesus. A fisherman of Bethsaida (Mk 1:16; Jn 1:44), he became an apostle of Jesus and author of two NT letters bearing his name. <em>See<\/em> Peter, The Apostle.<\/p>\n<li>2. Brother of Jesus, named with other brothers, James, Joses or Joseph, and Judas (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3).<\/li>\n<li>3. Leper, perhaps cured by Jesus, in whose house at Bethany Jesus and his disciples were eating when a woman poured an alabaster flask of costly ointment on the Lord’s head. Over the disciples’ objections against the waste of what could have been sold to support the poor, Jesus commended the act as a wonderful thing (Mt 26:6-13; Mk 14:3-9). From John 12:1-8 it appears that Simon’s house was also the house of Mary, Martha, and Lazarus, but their relationship to Simon is uncertain.<\/li>\n<li>4. Man of Cyrene, a district of North Africa, whom the Romans forced to carry Jesus’ cross (Mt 27:32; Mk 15:21; Lk 23:26). He was the father of Alexander and Rufus (Mk 15:21; cf. Rom 16:13).<\/li>\n<li>5. Apostle of Jesus called a Zealot (Lk 6:15), presumably because of prior association either with the party of political extremists by that name, who adopted terrorism to oppose the Roman occupation of Palestine, or with one of a number of Jewish groups noted for their zeal for the law. In Matthew 10:4 and Mark 3:18 he is designated the “Cananaean” (<span>rsv<\/span>)—from the Aramaic word for “zealot.” He is mentioned again in Acts 1:13 as one of the 11 apostles in Jerusalem after Jesus’ ascension. Otherwise, the NT is silent about him.<\/li>\n<li>6. Pharisee whose treatment of Jesus evoked the parable of the two debtors (Lk 7:36-50). He invited Jesus to eat at his house but withheld courtesies customary for guests and disapproved of Jesus’ acceptance of a “sinner” woman who wet the Lord’s feet with her tears, dried them with her hair, and anointed them with ointment from an alabaster flask. Jesus’ parable contrasted the woman’s act of loving and repentant faith with Simon’s unloving and self-righteous skepticism.<\/li>\n<li>7. Father of Judas Iscariot, the disciple who betrayed Jesus in Gethsemane (Jn 6:71; 13:2, 26).<\/li>\n<li>8. Magician (often called Simon Magus) of great repute in Samaria. Impressed by the signs and miracles performed by Philip the deacon-become-evangelist, he joined the crowd of baptized believers. He offered Peter and John money in exchange for the gift of the Holy Spirit, provoking Peter’s emphatic rebuke (Acts 8:9-24). From the association of this incident with his name, the English word “simony” is derived; it denotes the sale or purchase of church positions, or any profiteering from sacred things.<\/li>\n<li>9. Tanner of Joppa. Peter lodged at his house for many days (Acts 9:43; 10:6, 17, 32). On Simon’s housetop, Peter experienced the vision of a great sheet let down from heaven, containing animals and birds prohibited as food in Jewish law (10:15). Peter later recognized this vision as his preparation for consenting to preach the gospel to the Gentiles (vv 28-29).<\/li>","summary_ro":"SIMON Greek form of a Hebrew\/Aramaic name meaning “God has heard.” Nine men in the NT had this name: 1. Son of Jona (Mt 16:17) or John (Jn 1:42), Andrew’s brother (v 40), and surnamed Cephas and Peter (respectively Aramaic and Greek, for “rock,” v 42) by Jesus. A fisherman of Bethsaida (Mk 1:16; Jn 1:44), he became an apostle of Jesus and author of two NT letters bearing his name. See Peter, The Apostle. 2. Brother of Jesus, named with other brothers, James, Joses or Joseph, and Judas (Mt 13:...","summary_en":"SIMON Greek form of a Hebrew\/Aramaic name meaning “God has heard.” Nine men in the NT had this name: 1. Son of Jona (Mt 16:17) or John (Jn 1:42), Andrew’s brother (v 40), and surnamed Cephas and Peter (respectively Aramaic and Greek, for “rock,” v 42) by Jesus. A fisherman of Bethsaida (Mk 1:16; Jn 1:44), he became an apostle of Jesus and author of two NT letters bearing his name. See Peter, The Apostle. 2. Brother of Jesus, named with other brothers, James, Joses or Joseph, and Judas (Mt 13:...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"45":[{"id":3858,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Bartholomew, the Apostle","title_en":"Bartholomew, the Apostle","content_ro":"<h3>BARTHOLOMEW, T<span>he<\/span> A<span>postle<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Disciple of Jesus included in all four lists of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16; Acts 1:13), though not otherwise mentioned in the NT. Nothing is told about him in any of the lists. Because the name means “son of Tolmai,” it has been speculated that he was known by another name in addition to his “patronymic” name. In the lists in Matthew, Mark, and Luke (the synoptic Gospels), Bartholomew is named immediately after Philip, suggesting the possibility that the Nathanael brought by Philip to Jesus (Jn 1:45-50)—who seems to be linked with some of the disciples (Jn 21:2)—was Bartholomew. It thus seems possible that the apostle Bartholomew is referred to in the fourth Gospel by another name; it is not certain, however, that John’s references to Nathanael were intended to identify him as one of the Twelve.<\/p>\n<p>Eusebius, an early church historian, recorded an early tradition that Pantaenus, the first head of the catechetical school in Alexandria (<span>AD<\/span> 180), went to India and there found Christians who knew of the Gospel of Matthew in Hebrew letters. According to Eusebius, Bartholomew had preached to them and had left the Gospel of Matthew with them. In other traditions, Bartholomew was an evangelistic partner of Philip and Thomas and suffered martyrdom in Armenia.<\/p>\n<p>A number of spurious and apocryphal writings have been ascribed to Bartholomew; none of them is genuine. In the fourth century Jerome mentioned a Gospel of Bartholomew, which is also noted by a few other writers. There are also references to the so-called Questions of Bartholomew (extant in Greek, Latin, and Slavonic fragments) and to a Book of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ by Bartholomew (extant in Coptic). Other references were made to Acts of Bartholomew and Apocalypse of Bartholomew, both otherwise unknown.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Apostle, Apostleship; Apocrypha (several titles attributed to Bartholomew).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BARTHOLOMEW, T<span>he<\/span> A<span>postle<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Disciple of Jesus included in all four lists of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16; Acts 1:13), though not otherwise mentioned in the NT. Nothing is told about him in any of the lists. Because the name means “son of Tolmai,” it has been speculated that he was known by another name in addition to his “patronymic” name. In the lists in Matthew, Mark, and Luke (the synoptic Gospels), Bartholomew is named immediately after Philip, suggesting the possibility that the Nathanael brought by Philip to Jesus (Jn 1:45-50)—who seems to be linked with some of the disciples (Jn 21:2)—was Bartholomew. It thus seems possible that the apostle Bartholomew is referred to in the fourth Gospel by another name; it is not certain, however, that John’s references to Nathanael were intended to identify him as one of the Twelve.<\/p>\n<p>Eusebius, an early church historian, recorded an early tradition that Pantaenus, the first head of the catechetical school in Alexandria (<span>AD<\/span> 180), went to India and there found Christians who knew of the Gospel of Matthew in Hebrew letters. According to Eusebius, Bartholomew had preached to them and had left the Gospel of Matthew with them. In other traditions, Bartholomew was an evangelistic partner of Philip and Thomas and suffered martyrdom in Armenia.<\/p>\n<p>A number of spurious and apocryphal writings have been ascribed to Bartholomew; none of them is genuine. In the fourth century Jerome mentioned a Gospel of Bartholomew, which is also noted by a few other writers. There are also references to the so-called Questions of Bartholomew (extant in Greek, Latin, and Slavonic fragments) and to a Book of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ by Bartholomew (extant in Coptic). Other references were made to Acts of Bartholomew and Apocalypse of Bartholomew, both otherwise unknown.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Apostle, Apostleship; Apocrypha (several titles attributed to Bartholomew).<\/p>","summary_ro":"BARTHOLOMEW, The Apostle Disciple of Jesus included in all four lists of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16; Acts 1:13), though not otherwise mentioned in the NT. Nothing is told about him in any of the lists. Because the name means “son of Tolmai,” it has been speculated that he was known by another name in addition to his “patronymic” name. In the lists in Matthew, Mark, and Luke (the synoptic Gospels), Bartholomew is named immediately after Philip, suggesting the possibilit...","summary_en":"BARTHOLOMEW, The Apostle Disciple of Jesus included in all four lists of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16; Acts 1:13), though not otherwise mentioned in the NT. Nothing is told about him in any of the lists. Because the name means “son of Tolmai,” it has been speculated that he was known by another name in addition to his “patronymic” name. In the lists in Matthew, Mark, and Luke (the synoptic Gospels), Bartholomew is named immediately after Philip, suggesting the possibilit...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":11406,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Exodus","title_en":"Book of Exodus","content_ro":"<h3>EXODUS, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Second book of the Bible, containing the story of God’s liberation of the people of Israel from slavery in Egypt. Few books of the OT are as important historically and theologically as the book of Exodus.<\/p>\n<p>Historically, the exodus event was the birth of Israel as a nation. At Mt Sinai a group of tribes who were descendants of Abraham became a nation ruled by God. The book of Exodus explains how the Israelites were able to resettle the land God had promised to Abraham and gives the basis for this religious, political, and social life.<\/p>\n<p>Theologically, the book of Exodus is so frequently referred to in the OT and NT that theologians speak of an “exodus motif.” In Psalm 68, for example, David received assurance in remembering that his God was the same one who rescued Israel from Egypt. The prophet Jeremiah compared the future regathering of Israel to their exodus from Egypt as an even more miraculous event (Jer 16:14-15). The return of Jesus and his parents from Egypt is associated with the exodus in Matthew 2:13-15. The deliverance of the Jewish people from Egypt was interpreted as a prototype for God’s freeing of all his people, both Israel and the church. Thus, the message of the book of Exodus is foundational to understanding God’s plan of salvation throughout the Bible.<\/p>\n<p>The English title “Exodus” comes from the Septuagint, a pre-Christian translation of the OT into Greek. The word means “a way out” or “departure” and refers to Israel’s rescue from Egypt. The Hebrew title is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shemoth<\/span> (“these are the names”), from the book’s opening words, referring to the names of the sons of Jacob who joined Joseph in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>According to tradition, Exodus and the entire Pentateuch (first five books of the Bible) were written by Moses. Exodus was probably written at Mt Sinai or shortly after the events there, according to this view. There is much to support that claim: (1) The book states that Moses wrote God’s words in at least one book (Ex 17:14; 24:2, 7; 34:27-28). According to Deuteronomy 31:9, 24, Moses recorded God’s law in a book that was deposited beside the ark of the covenant as a witness for God. (2) Many OT writers referred to portions of Exodus as the “law of Moses” (1 Kgs 2:3; 2 Chr 34:14; Neh 8:1; 13:1). The NT, including the testimony of Jesus, calls Moses the author (Mk 7:10; 12:26; Jn 1:45; 7:19).<\/p>\n<p>Various other theories about the origin of Exodus have been proposed. Some scholars credit Moses with writing nearly the entire book. One writer claims that Moses was an unknown desert sheikh who never even met the Israelites. Some critics think they detect in the book several documents from various periods in Israel’s history that were finally put together by an editor centuries after Moses’ death. Others have isolated various literary forms, such as the “Song of Moses” (Ex 15), and traced their development. Another interpretation says that the exodus story was passed on by word of mouth for many generations before being written.<\/p>\n<p>Although such theories are held by biblical scholars, they deny what the text of the book repeatedly affirms: that Moses wrote Exodus. The book of Exodus contains evidence of being written by an eyewitness. Only such a person would recall, for example, that there were 12 fountains and 70 palm trees at Elim (Ex 15:27). The author shows a thorough knowledge of Egyptian court life, customs, and language. Some of the materials used to construct the tabernacle, such as acacia wood for its furniture (25:10) and rams’ skins for the outer covering (v 5), are found in Egypt and the Sinai Peninsula but not in Palestine. The book thus seems to have had a desert setting.<\/p>\n<p>Moses was not only commissioned by God to write the book of Exodus, but he was also well qualified. He was “instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, and he was mighty in his words and deeds” (Acts 7:22, <span>rsv<\/span>). In addition, the 40 years spent in the wilderness of Midian and Sinai gave him a thorough knowledge of the geography and wildlife of the regions through which the Israelites traveled. The events of the exodus—deliverance from the Egyptians and God’s giving of the law—were so central to the history of Israel that Moses took special care to preserve the record so it could be passed on to following generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>If one accepts the traditional view that Moses wrote Exodus, then the book is to be dated in the time of Moses. Two dates are generally suggested for the exodus from Egypt.<\/p>\n\n<h5>The “Late Date” View<\/h5>\n<p>This view says that the pharaoh who oppressed the Israelites was Seti I (Sethos, c. 1304–1290 <span>BC<\/span>) and the pharaoh of the exodus was Ramses II (c. 1290–1224 <span>BC<\/span>). The exodus would thus have occurred in 1290, and the conquest of Canaan would have begun in 1250. There are two principal arguments for this view: (1) According to Exodus 1:11, the Israelites were forced to build the store city of Rameses; therefore, Ramses II must have been ruling at the time. But the city of Rameses could have existed earlier under a different name and then been renamed after Ramses II when he rebuilt it. Or there could have been an earlier monarch named Ramses who commissioned its construction. (2) There is archaeological evidence of movements of people and widespread destruction in Canaan around 1250 <span>BC<\/span>. If this destruction was caused by the Hebrew conquest under Joshua, it would place the exodus around 1290. But it could just as easily have been the result of social turbulence and anarchy in the period of the Israelite judges, or of the military activities of neighboring peoples.<\/p>\n<h5>The “Early Date” View<\/h5>\n<p>This view says that the pharaoh of the oppression was Thutmose III (c. 1504–1450 <span>BC<\/span>) and the pharaoh of the exodus was Amenhotep II (c. 1450–1424 <span>BC<\/span>). Thus, the exodus would have occurred about 1440, and the conquest would have begun around 1400. Three chief arguments support that view: (1) If the fourth year of King Solomon was 966 <span>BC<\/span>, then the 480 years of 1 Kings 6:1 would place the exodus at 1446. (2) If the time of Jephthah was 1100 <span>BC<\/span>, then the 300 years of Judges 11:26 would date the conquest at 1400. (3) The late date would not leave enough time for the period of the judges, which most chronologies indicate lasted between 300 and 400 years. On the basis of such biblical references to the date of the exodus, the early date appears preferable.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Some events in Egypt during the period covered by the book of Exodus shed additional light on the biblical record. Exodus 12:40 records that the Israelites lived in Egypt for 430 years. That would place the settling of Jacob and his family in Goshen (Gn 47:4, 11) at about 1870 <span>BC<\/span>, during the powerful 12th dynasty of Egypt’s Middle Kingdom. Around the turn of the century, two weaker dynasties followed. Semite invaders from Asia began to infiltrate northern (or Lower) Egypt. Those outsiders, known as the Hyksos, were able to displace the native dynasty with their own king around 1730. That was the “new king” who “did not know Joseph” (Ex 1:8). Being foreigners themselves, they were naturally concerned about the Israelites, who were too many and too mighty for them (v 9). Enslavement was the easiest solution to the problem of the Israelites. The Hyksos kings could use the new source of labor to enlarge Rameses, at that time the capital of Lower Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Not until about 1580 <span>BC<\/span> were the Egyptians, led by Ahmose, able to drive out the Hyksos and reestablish an Egyptian line of kings. Because the Israelites were still multiplying, despite their hard labor, the pharaohs of the 18th dynasty continued their bondage and decreed that all male children must be killed. When Moses was born (c. 1560 <span>BC<\/span>), that edict was still in effect. Thutmose I (1539–1514), the great empire builder and third of that dynasty, was pharaoh.<\/p>\n<p>Thutmose I’s only surviving legal heir was a daughter, Hatshepsut. Her husband assumed the name Thutmose II (1514–1504). When he died, another of the pharaoh’s descendants was named the successor—Thutmose III (1504–1450), who was ten years old at the time. Hatshepsut took the kingdom from the young ruler and controlled it for 22 years (1503–1482). Such a strong-willed woman could have the nerve to disobey her father’s command by saving the life of a Hebrew baby and raising him in the palace at Thebes.<\/p>\n<p>Hatshepsut, who continued to rule despite Thutmose III’s coronation, possibly intended for Moses to have the throne, or at least a high position in the realm. Thutmose III, once he had full power after Hatshepsut’s death, would have been eager to do away with Moses. Moses’ hurried flight into the wilderness after killing the overseer fits well with such historical possibilities. Thutmose III’s death in 1450 <span>BC<\/span> opened the way for Moses to return and confront Pharaoh Amenhotep II with God’s command, “Let my people go.”<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the book of Exodus is to show how God’s promise to Abraham (Gn 15:12-16) was fulfilled when the Lord rescued the Israelite descendants of Abraham from Egyptian bondage. It also explains the origin of the Passover festival, the beginning of the nation by God’s establishment of a covenant with Israel, and the giving of the law on Mt Sinai.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Exodus tells the moving story of a mighty God, creator of the universe, beyond all limitations of time and space, who intervenes in history on behalf of a helpless group of slaves. God defeats the ruler of the greatest empire on earth and then leads his oppressed people from that land to freedom. Exodus is the story of a single family that providentially grows into a multitude. Through God’s covenant a nation is formed, and through his law the nation is given stability and set apart from all its neighbors. The book of Exodus tells of an unusual man, whose 80 years of preparation are equally divided between the palace of a king and the pasture of a nomadic priest. Moses is a reluctant leader, but he defies the pharaoh, speaks with God face-to-face, and writes nearly one-fourth of the Hebrew Scriptures.<\/p>\n<p>The God of Exodus is faithful. He makes promises and keeps them. Genesis 15:13-16 records an amazing prophecy: “Then the <span>Lord<\/span> said to Abram, ‘Know of a surety that your descendants will be sojourners in a land that is not theirs, and will be slaves there, and they will be oppressed for four hundred years; but I will bring judgment on the nation which they serve, and afterward they shall come out with great possessions. . . . And they shall come back here in the fourth generation’ ” (<span>rsv<\/span>). In response to this promise, Joseph, “at the end of his life, made mention of the exodus of the Israelites and gave directions concerning his burial” (Heb 11:22, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>That promise provides a background for the drama of redemption on which the book of Exodus focuses. Redemption can be defined as “deliverance from the power of an alien dominion, and enjoyment of the resulting freedom.” It speaks of a deliverer and what he does to achieve deliverance. The book of Exodus is full of the vocabulary of redemption. It tells of the God who “remembers” his promise to the Hebrew patriarchs (Ex 2:24; 6:5). God “comes down to deliver” the Israelites (3:8), or “save” them (14:30; 15:2), in order to “bring them” out of the land of Egypt (3:10-12). Redemption involves these aspects:<\/p>\n<p>1. The Lord is the author of redemption. In Exodus 6:1-8, as God answered Moses’ prayer to deliver his people, he used the pronoun “I” 18 times to emphasize that he was the one initiating the action. The Hebrew descendants of Abraham had known God primarily by the Hebrew name “El,” a common title in the ancient Near East for the supreme deity. But in Exodus, Israel learned that God is “Jehovah” or “Yahweh.” That is his personal name, a reminder that he is the God of the covenant who personally cares for his people’s welfare. In Exodus 3:14, God told Moses, “I am who I am” or “I will be who I will be.” Some scholars think that statement shows that the name Yahweh comes from the Hebrew verb “to be.” In any case, the concept of “name” in the Hebrew culture is synonymous with “character.” To know the name of God is to know something of his character. Israel knew God as the one who is eternally self-existent yet present with them wherever they would go, acting on their behalf (Ex 3:12; 33:14-16).<\/p>\n<li>2. The reason for redemption was God’s promise to the forefathers of the Israelites. When God heard the groaning of the people of Israel, he remembered his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob (Ex 2:24; cf. 6:5). In response to their need, he selected an agent of redemption, the unwilling Moses. Moses exhausted every possible excuse, but God would not take no for an answer. Moses is a vivid example of how God prepares, empowers, and sustains his chosen servants, using them to accomplish his purpose.<\/li>\n<li>3. The motive of redemption was God’s grace and love (Ex 15:13; 20:6; 34:6-7). The purpose of redemption was that Israel and the Egyptians might know God (6:7; 7:5; 8:10; 14:18). The Lord worked so that all who were involved—Moses, the Israelites, Pharaoh, and the Egyptians—would be sure that he alone is God. The Hebrew understanding of knowledge is not primarily intellectual but experience-oriented. The desired response to God’s action is not mere mental assent but also faith and obedience.<\/li>\n<li>4. Redemption is achieved in Exodus by miracles (4:21)—all natural processes controlled supernaturally by God. They are variously described as signs and wonders (7:3), great acts of judgment (6:6; 7:4), and “the finger of God” (8:19). Such miracles were not frivolous fireworks but purposeful works of God. Some of the miracles prove that Moses was sent by God. The miraculous plagues proved that God is supreme, for each of them was a direct challenge to one of the gods of Egypt: Osiris the river god, Yeqt the frog god, Ra (Re) the sun god, Athor the cattle god. The miracles in the wilderness proved that God fulfills all the needs of his people.<\/li>\n<li>5. The pharaoh was the villain—a picture of rebellious humanity confronted by God’s command (Ex 4:21-23). Ten times the pharaoh hardened his heart. Yet, in a sense, it was God who hardened the pharaoh’s heart, effecting the king’s decision to defy him.<\/li>\n<li>6. The Passover marked the purchase of redemption (Ex 12:23-27; 15:16). It was a clear example of salvation by substitution. When the death angel saw the blood on the doorposts and lintels, he passed by.<\/li>\n<li>7. The recipients of God’s redemption in Exodus were the Israelites. God took them as his own special people (6:7), and they were no longer free to do as they pleased. Even before the exodus he had claimed them, telling Pharaoh, “Israel is my first-born son, and I say to you, ‘Let my son go that he may serve me’ ” (4:22-23, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/li>\n<li>8. The demand of redemption was obedience. On the basis of his deliverance of the Israelites from bondage, God set forth the Ten Commandments (20:1-17) and the rest of the law for them to obey. The people, though quick to pledge their obedience (19:8; 24:3), were even quicker to disobey (32:8). Because the Lord is holy and wants his people to be holy and wholehearted in devotion (34:14), he must punish iniquity. But being compassionate, he also forgives. Throughout the centuries of Israel’s history, God pleaded with his people through the prophets to remember the exodus and repent (see Mi 6:3-4). The faithful responded in gratitude with Moses’ “song of redemption” (Ex 15; cf. Rv 15:3-4).<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<p>The book of Exodus can be divided into four sections, each describing one aspect of God’s dealings with the Israelites during the 15th century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Unveiling (Ex 1–6)<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Exodus begins with the 70 descendants of Jacob who joined Joseph in Egypt for the duration of a famine that was afflicting their land (cf. Gn 46–50). After more than a century of prosperity for the Israelites in the land of Goshen, a new dynasty is established in Egypt whose leaders are not friendly toward Israel. In order to stem the rapid growth of the Hebrew people, the Egyptians force them to do hard labor, building storage cities for the pharaoh.<\/p>\n<p>A further command requires all Israelite male children to be killed at birth. The superintendents of the midwives do not comply, however, and God rewards them—not to show his approval of their lie but because they fear and obey God rather than the pharaoh. A new command calls for all male Israelite babies to be drowned in the Nile River. One special child, who escapes when Pharaoh’s daughter has his basket fished out of the Nile, is Moses. Ironically, Moses’ mother is paid by the princess to raise her own child, who grows up in the palace as the princess’s adopted son.<\/p>\n<p>As an adult, Moses chooses to identify with his Hebrew kin, a tribute to the early instruction given him by his godly parents (see Heb 11:24-26). He sets out to liberate Israel from the Egyptians, one man at a time. But he has to flee to Midian, at the eastern edge of the Sinai Peninsula or in Arabia beyond the northern top of the Gulf of Aqaba. Moses marries into the household of Jethro, also named Reuel. Reuel (“friend of God”) is probably the man’s personal name, and Jethro (“excellence”) his title. Because he is called a “priest of Midian” (Ex 2:16), some scholars have maintained a “Kenite hypothesis,” suggesting that Moses adopted the religion of his father-in-law and taught it to the Israelites. But the Bible states that Moses received his religion by a direct revelation from God. Jethro seems to believe only after he sees that God has rescued Israel from the Egyptians (18:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>While their future deliverer is in Midian, the Israelites continue to be oppressed and cry out to God in their misery (2:23-25). God responds by descending to his people. He came down to rescue Israel (3:8). He appears to Moses in a burning bush and identifies himself as the same God who promised the patriarchs a land “flowing with milk and honey” (3:17). Moses will lead the Israelites there, assisted by his brother, Aaron.<\/p>\n<p>Assured that God’s presence and miraculous signs will accompany him, Moses takes his wife Zipporah and his two sons and departs for Egypt. On the way, the Lord meets him and seeks to put him to death (4:24). That is probably the Hebrew way of saying that God strikes him with a mortal illness. Moses, who is going to deliver God’s people, has neglected the sign of the covenant in failing to circumcise one of his sons (Gn 17:14). Moses recovers after the rite is performed and continues on to Egypt, meeting Aaron at Mt Sinai. Their reception by the Israelites is more cordial than that of Pharaoh, who refuses to honor the God who sent Moses. Instead of releasing the Israelites to offer sacrifices to their God in the wilderness, he increases their burdens. The people complain to Moses, and Moses complains to God. God appears again to Moses (Ex 6), reassuring him that Israel will be delivered by divine power. God’s plan is not a failure—he is just beginning to put it into action.<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Deliverance (Ex 7–19)<\/h5>\n<p>Chapters 7–12 record ten plagues with which God afflicts the Egyptians. Even before the first of them, the pharaoh has hardened his heart to defy God (7:13). There are three cycles of three plagues each:<\/p>\n\n<p> The first three plagues affect both the Egyptians and the Israelites; the Israelites are protected from the final six. The Egyptian magicians are able to duplicate the first two plagues, but when the third strikes, they admit, “This is the finger of God” (8:19). After the plague of flies covers the land, the pharaoh offers Moses the first of four compromises, but Moses refuses all of them (8:25-29; 10:8-11, 24-29). The first plagues are merely unpleasant, but the final ones are destructive and inflict much suffering. Since all of the plagues are common to that area, they themselves are not miraculous. The miracle is how the phenomena are multiplied and limited to the land of Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>The nine plagues serve to harden the pharaoh’s heart even more, so God prepares one final stroke. The death of every firstborn male, among both animals and humans, will be the fatal blow. God warns the Israelites to get ready to leave. To avert the death angel, they must put blood from an unblemished yearling male sheep or goat on their doorways. While they are eating the Passover meal, the death angel begins moving through the land of Egypt. In anguish the pharaoh drives the Israelites from the land; the slaves are free at last. Just as he has promised, the Lord goes before the children of Israel in a pillar of cloud by day and of fire by night.<\/p>\n<p>But once again the pharaoh’s heart is hardened and he gives pursuit. God parts the waters of the sea with a great wind. The literal meaning of the name given that body of water is “sea of reeds.” It could refer to any shoreline where the water is sufficiently shallow for such plants to grow (see 1 Kgs 9:26, where the same term refers to the Gulf of Aqaba near Eloth). Whatever the location, there God hands the Egyptians their final defeat. The rescue is complete.<\/p>\n<p>Moses and the Israelites respond with renewed faith in the Lord and with a song of victory and praise (Ex 14:31–15:21). Soon, however, thanksgiving turns into grumbling because of bitter water (15:22-26), lack of meat and bread (16:1-15), and lack of water (17:1-7). In each situation God provides for their need. He also gives them victory over the Amalekites (vv 8-16). As the Israelites approach Mt Sinai, Moses’ family rejoins him, accompanied by Jethro. Jethro now confesses his faith in the God of the Israelites and shares in a fellowship meal with the leaders. He also assists Moses in reorganizing the judicial system, then returns to Midian (ch 18).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites arrive at Mt Sinai, also called Horeb (3:1), and prepare to meet the Lord who has rescued them in fulfillment of his promise to Moses (v 12). The Lord establishes his covenant with Israel, taking them as his own possession, “a kingdom of priests, my holy nation.” They quickly respond, “We will certainly do everything the <span>Lord<\/span> asks of us” (19:5-8, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Instruction (Ex 20–24)<\/h5>\n<p>The God who redeems a people, who literally “buys them back from slavery,” has a right to make certain demands of them. The commandments God gives to Israel at Sinai are not burdensome requirements but protective guidelines for living as God’s people (20:2-3).<\/p>\n<p>The Law (or Torah, meaning “instruction”) revealed at Sinai consists of three parts:<\/p>\n<p>1. The Ten Commandments (ch 20), addressing a person’s relationship to God and other people. Based on God’s nature (and therefore permanent), the Ten Commandments are unique in the history of the nations.<\/p>\n<li>2. The judgments (chs 21–23), social regulations for governing the people as a theocracy, similar in many ways to the law codes of Israel’s neighbors.<\/li>\n<li>3. Ordinances (chs 24–31) regulating religious ceremonies.<\/li>\n<p>All of the laws are given to Moses during the weeks he spends with God on the mountain.<\/p>\n<p>The Ten Commandments form the basis of all other laws in Israel (20:1-17). The first five deal with honoring the Lord, the second five with respecting one’s neighbor. The last commandment deals with one’s thoughts and intentions rather than with specific actions. It thus forms a safeguard against all sins not included in the first nine.<\/p>\n<p>The judgments recorded in chapters 21–23 deal with master-slave relationships (21:1-11), offenses punishable by death (vv 12-17), compensation for injury to persons or damage to property (21:18–22:15), various interpersonal relationships (22:16–23:9), and Sabbaths, feasts, and the offering of firstfruits (23:10-19). Many of the judgments would not take effect until Israel settled in the Promised Land. Accordingly, that section of the Law closes with a solemn warning against being rebellious and adopting pagan ways. It also contains a bright promise that God will drive out Israel’s enemies, protect his people from sickness, and grant them prosperity, if they obey the Lord’s commands (23:22).<\/p>\n<p>Exodus 24 records a reaffirmation of the covenant between God and Israel, as Moses seals it with the blood of a sacrifice. In response, God appears to the leaders of the people, giving them a glimpse of his splendor. Then Moses ascends the mountain one more time to receive the stone tablets containing the commandments, as well as further instructions regarding the meeting tent (tabernacle), the priesthood, and worship.<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Presence with his People (Ex 25–40)<\/h5>\n<p>After the Lord redeemed the Israelites, he told Moses, “I will make you my own special people, and I will be your God. And you will know that I am the <span>Lord<\/span> your God who has rescued you from your slavery in Egypt” (6:7, <span>nlt<\/span>). Moses had seen that wonderful promise fulfilled, yet one further step remained: “I want the people of Israel to build me a sacred residence where I can live among them” (25:8). God’s dwelling among his people is possible because God had descended to deliver the people and because they had pledged to meet his demands. God calls for a contribution from all whose hearts were willing to give, and he shows Moses a detailed pattern of the tabernacle and its furniture. Aaron and his sons are set apart to serve in the tent. Stipulations for the various offerings, including the Day of Atonement, are given. God tells Moses that he has chosen Bezalel and Oholiab to build the tabernacle and to craft its furnishings, having filled them with his Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>In the meantime the Israelites, who so recently promised total obedience, grow impatient as Moses lingers for 40 days on the mountain. They demand that Aaron make an idol for them. Under pressure, Aaron complies and forms a molten calf, a representation of a pagan deity (32:4).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord informs Moses of the people’s idolatry, revelry, and immorality and says that he is angry enough to destroy all of them and start again with Moses’ offspring. Moses pleads for Israel until the Lord relents, then descends from the mountain to punish the people. Moses pleads again for forgiveness for Israel, and God in mercy pardons their terrible sin (34:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Once more God offers to make a covenant with the people (34:10). Moses spends another 40 days with the Lord, writing the commandments on tablets to replace those smashed when he saw the golden calf. When he returns to the people, his face shines from being in God’s presence, and he must keep it veiled.<\/p>\n<p>Now that Israel has been restored to God’s favor, the construction of the tabernacle can begin. The contributions are so generous that Moses must restrain the people from bringing any more. Finally, all is ready. Moses examines the tabernacle, and it is erected on the first day of the first month, nearly a year after the first Passover. The priests are consecrated, the lamps are lit, and the first burnt sacrifice is offered. A cloud descends, filling the tabernacle with the glory of the Lord. God dwells among his people, the goal of redemption has been attained, and the drama of the book of Exodus has come to an end.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Chronology of the Bible (Old Testament); Egypt, Egyptian; Exodus, The; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Israel, History of; Moses; Plagues upon Egypt; Tabernacle; Temple; Commandments, The Ten.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>EXODUS, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Second book of the Bible, containing the story of God’s liberation of the people of Israel from slavery in Egypt. Few books of the OT are as important historically and theologically as the book of Exodus.<\/p>\n<p>Historically, the exodus event was the birth of Israel as a nation. At Mt Sinai a group of tribes who were descendants of Abraham became a nation ruled by God. The book of Exodus explains how the Israelites were able to resettle the land God had promised to Abraham and gives the basis for this religious, political, and social life.<\/p>\n<p>Theologically, the book of Exodus is so frequently referred to in the OT and NT that theologians speak of an “exodus motif.” In Psalm 68, for example, David received assurance in remembering that his God was the same one who rescued Israel from Egypt. The prophet Jeremiah compared the future regathering of Israel to their exodus from Egypt as an even more miraculous event (Jer 16:14-15). The return of Jesus and his parents from Egypt is associated with the exodus in Matthew 2:13-15. The deliverance of the Jewish people from Egypt was interpreted as a prototype for God’s freeing of all his people, both Israel and the church. Thus, the message of the book of Exodus is foundational to understanding God’s plan of salvation throughout the Bible.<\/p>\n<p>The English title “Exodus” comes from the Septuagint, a pre-Christian translation of the OT into Greek. The word means “a way out” or “departure” and refers to Israel’s rescue from Egypt. The Hebrew title is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shemoth<\/span> (“these are the names”), from the book’s opening words, referring to the names of the sons of Jacob who joined Joseph in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>According to tradition, Exodus and the entire Pentateuch (first five books of the Bible) were written by Moses. Exodus was probably written at Mt Sinai or shortly after the events there, according to this view. There is much to support that claim: (1) The book states that Moses wrote God’s words in at least one book (Ex 17:14; 24:2, 7; 34:27-28). According to Deuteronomy 31:9, 24, Moses recorded God’s law in a book that was deposited beside the ark of the covenant as a witness for God. (2) Many OT writers referred to portions of Exodus as the “law of Moses” (1 Kgs 2:3; 2 Chr 34:14; Neh 8:1; 13:1). The NT, including the testimony of Jesus, calls Moses the author (Mk 7:10; 12:26; Jn 1:45; 7:19).<\/p>\n<p>Various other theories about the origin of Exodus have been proposed. Some scholars credit Moses with writing nearly the entire book. One writer claims that Moses was an unknown desert sheikh who never even met the Israelites. Some critics think they detect in the book several documents from various periods in Israel’s history that were finally put together by an editor centuries after Moses’ death. Others have isolated various literary forms, such as the “Song of Moses” (Ex 15), and traced their development. Another interpretation says that the exodus story was passed on by word of mouth for many generations before being written.<\/p>\n<p>Although such theories are held by biblical scholars, they deny what the text of the book repeatedly affirms: that Moses wrote Exodus. The book of Exodus contains evidence of being written by an eyewitness. Only such a person would recall, for example, that there were 12 fountains and 70 palm trees at Elim (Ex 15:27). The author shows a thorough knowledge of Egyptian court life, customs, and language. Some of the materials used to construct the tabernacle, such as acacia wood for its furniture (25:10) and rams’ skins for the outer covering (v 5), are found in Egypt and the Sinai Peninsula but not in Palestine. The book thus seems to have had a desert setting.<\/p>\n<p>Moses was not only commissioned by God to write the book of Exodus, but he was also well qualified. He was “instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, and he was mighty in his words and deeds” (Acts 7:22, <span>rsv<\/span>). In addition, the 40 years spent in the wilderness of Midian and Sinai gave him a thorough knowledge of the geography and wildlife of the regions through which the Israelites traveled. The events of the exodus—deliverance from the Egyptians and God’s giving of the law—were so central to the history of Israel that Moses took special care to preserve the record so it could be passed on to following generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>If one accepts the traditional view that Moses wrote Exodus, then the book is to be dated in the time of Moses. Two dates are generally suggested for the exodus from Egypt.<\/p>\n\n<h5>The “Late Date” View<\/h5>\n<p>This view says that the pharaoh who oppressed the Israelites was Seti I (Sethos, c. 1304–1290 <span>BC<\/span>) and the pharaoh of the exodus was Ramses II (c. 1290–1224 <span>BC<\/span>). The exodus would thus have occurred in 1290, and the conquest of Canaan would have begun in 1250. There are two principal arguments for this view: (1) According to Exodus 1:11, the Israelites were forced to build the store city of Rameses; therefore, Ramses II must have been ruling at the time. But the city of Rameses could have existed earlier under a different name and then been renamed after Ramses II when he rebuilt it. Or there could have been an earlier monarch named Ramses who commissioned its construction. (2) There is archaeological evidence of movements of people and widespread destruction in Canaan around 1250 <span>BC<\/span>. If this destruction was caused by the Hebrew conquest under Joshua, it would place the exodus around 1290. But it could just as easily have been the result of social turbulence and anarchy in the period of the Israelite judges, or of the military activities of neighboring peoples.<\/p>\n<h5>The “Early Date” View<\/h5>\n<p>This view says that the pharaoh of the oppression was Thutmose III (c. 1504–1450 <span>BC<\/span>) and the pharaoh of the exodus was Amenhotep II (c. 1450–1424 <span>BC<\/span>). Thus, the exodus would have occurred about 1440, and the conquest would have begun around 1400. Three chief arguments support that view: (1) If the fourth year of King Solomon was 966 <span>BC<\/span>, then the 480 years of 1 Kings 6:1 would place the exodus at 1446. (2) If the time of Jephthah was 1100 <span>BC<\/span>, then the 300 years of Judges 11:26 would date the conquest at 1400. (3) The late date would not leave enough time for the period of the judges, which most chronologies indicate lasted between 300 and 400 years. On the basis of such biblical references to the date of the exodus, the early date appears preferable.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Some events in Egypt during the period covered by the book of Exodus shed additional light on the biblical record. Exodus 12:40 records that the Israelites lived in Egypt for 430 years. That would place the settling of Jacob and his family in Goshen (Gn 47:4, 11) at about 1870 <span>BC<\/span>, during the powerful 12th dynasty of Egypt’s Middle Kingdom. Around the turn of the century, two weaker dynasties followed. Semite invaders from Asia began to infiltrate northern (or Lower) Egypt. Those outsiders, known as the Hyksos, were able to displace the native dynasty with their own king around 1730. That was the “new king” who “did not know Joseph” (Ex 1:8). Being foreigners themselves, they were naturally concerned about the Israelites, who were too many and too mighty for them (v 9). Enslavement was the easiest solution to the problem of the Israelites. The Hyksos kings could use the new source of labor to enlarge Rameses, at that time the capital of Lower Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Not until about 1580 <span>BC<\/span> were the Egyptians, led by Ahmose, able to drive out the Hyksos and reestablish an Egyptian line of kings. Because the Israelites were still multiplying, despite their hard labor, the pharaohs of the 18th dynasty continued their bondage and decreed that all male children must be killed. When Moses was born (c. 1560 <span>BC<\/span>), that edict was still in effect. Thutmose I (1539–1514), the great empire builder and third of that dynasty, was pharaoh.<\/p>\n<p>Thutmose I’s only surviving legal heir was a daughter, Hatshepsut. Her husband assumed the name Thutmose II (1514–1504). When he died, another of the pharaoh’s descendants was named the successor—Thutmose III (1504–1450), who was ten years old at the time. Hatshepsut took the kingdom from the young ruler and controlled it for 22 years (1503–1482). Such a strong-willed woman could have the nerve to disobey her father’s command by saving the life of a Hebrew baby and raising him in the palace at Thebes.<\/p>\n<p>Hatshepsut, who continued to rule despite Thutmose III’s coronation, possibly intended for Moses to have the throne, or at least a high position in the realm. Thutmose III, once he had full power after Hatshepsut’s death, would have been eager to do away with Moses. Moses’ hurried flight into the wilderness after killing the overseer fits well with such historical possibilities. Thutmose III’s death in 1450 <span>BC<\/span> opened the way for Moses to return and confront Pharaoh Amenhotep II with God’s command, “Let my people go.”<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the book of Exodus is to show how God’s promise to Abraham (Gn 15:12-16) was fulfilled when the Lord rescued the Israelite descendants of Abraham from Egyptian bondage. It also explains the origin of the Passover festival, the beginning of the nation by God’s establishment of a covenant with Israel, and the giving of the law on Mt Sinai.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Exodus tells the moving story of a mighty God, creator of the universe, beyond all limitations of time and space, who intervenes in history on behalf of a helpless group of slaves. God defeats the ruler of the greatest empire on earth and then leads his oppressed people from that land to freedom. Exodus is the story of a single family that providentially grows into a multitude. Through God’s covenant a nation is formed, and through his law the nation is given stability and set apart from all its neighbors. The book of Exodus tells of an unusual man, whose 80 years of preparation are equally divided between the palace of a king and the pasture of a nomadic priest. Moses is a reluctant leader, but he defies the pharaoh, speaks with God face-to-face, and writes nearly one-fourth of the Hebrew Scriptures.<\/p>\n<p>The God of Exodus is faithful. He makes promises and keeps them. Genesis 15:13-16 records an amazing prophecy: “Then the <span>Lord<\/span> said to Abram, ‘Know of a surety that your descendants will be sojourners in a land that is not theirs, and will be slaves there, and they will be oppressed for four hundred years; but I will bring judgment on the nation which they serve, and afterward they shall come out with great possessions. . . . And they shall come back here in the fourth generation’ ” (<span>rsv<\/span>). In response to this promise, Joseph, “at the end of his life, made mention of the exodus of the Israelites and gave directions concerning his burial” (Heb 11:22, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>That promise provides a background for the drama of redemption on which the book of Exodus focuses. Redemption can be defined as “deliverance from the power of an alien dominion, and enjoyment of the resulting freedom.” It speaks of a deliverer and what he does to achieve deliverance. The book of Exodus is full of the vocabulary of redemption. It tells of the God who “remembers” his promise to the Hebrew patriarchs (Ex 2:24; 6:5). God “comes down to deliver” the Israelites (3:8), or “save” them (14:30; 15:2), in order to “bring them” out of the land of Egypt (3:10-12). Redemption involves these aspects:<\/p>\n<p>1. The Lord is the author of redemption. In Exodus 6:1-8, as God answered Moses’ prayer to deliver his people, he used the pronoun “I” 18 times to emphasize that he was the one initiating the action. The Hebrew descendants of Abraham had known God primarily by the Hebrew name “El,” a common title in the ancient Near East for the supreme deity. But in Exodus, Israel learned that God is “Jehovah” or “Yahweh.” That is his personal name, a reminder that he is the God of the covenant who personally cares for his people’s welfare. In Exodus 3:14, God told Moses, “I am who I am” or “I will be who I will be.” Some scholars think that statement shows that the name Yahweh comes from the Hebrew verb “to be.” In any case, the concept of “name” in the Hebrew culture is synonymous with “character.” To know the name of God is to know something of his character. Israel knew God as the one who is eternally self-existent yet present with them wherever they would go, acting on their behalf (Ex 3:12; 33:14-16).<\/p>\n<li>2. The reason for redemption was God’s promise to the forefathers of the Israelites. When God heard the groaning of the people of Israel, he remembered his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob (Ex 2:24; cf. 6:5). In response to their need, he selected an agent of redemption, the unwilling Moses. Moses exhausted every possible excuse, but God would not take no for an answer. Moses is a vivid example of how God prepares, empowers, and sustains his chosen servants, using them to accomplish his purpose.<\/li>\n<li>3. The motive of redemption was God’s grace and love (Ex 15:13; 20:6; 34:6-7). The purpose of redemption was that Israel and the Egyptians might know God (6:7; 7:5; 8:10; 14:18). The Lord worked so that all who were involved—Moses, the Israelites, Pharaoh, and the Egyptians—would be sure that he alone is God. The Hebrew understanding of knowledge is not primarily intellectual but experience-oriented. The desired response to God’s action is not mere mental assent but also faith and obedience.<\/li>\n<li>4. Redemption is achieved in Exodus by miracles (4:21)—all natural processes controlled supernaturally by God. They are variously described as signs and wonders (7:3), great acts of judgment (6:6; 7:4), and “the finger of God” (8:19). Such miracles were not frivolous fireworks but purposeful works of God. Some of the miracles prove that Moses was sent by God. The miraculous plagues proved that God is supreme, for each of them was a direct challenge to one of the gods of Egypt: Osiris the river god, Yeqt the frog god, Ra (Re) the sun god, Athor the cattle god. The miracles in the wilderness proved that God fulfills all the needs of his people.<\/li>\n<li>5. The pharaoh was the villain—a picture of rebellious humanity confronted by God’s command (Ex 4:21-23). Ten times the pharaoh hardened his heart. Yet, in a sense, it was God who hardened the pharaoh’s heart, effecting the king’s decision to defy him.<\/li>\n<li>6. The Passover marked the purchase of redemption (Ex 12:23-27; 15:16). It was a clear example of salvation by substitution. When the death angel saw the blood on the doorposts and lintels, he passed by.<\/li>\n<li>7. The recipients of God’s redemption in Exodus were the Israelites. God took them as his own special people (6:7), and they were no longer free to do as they pleased. Even before the exodus he had claimed them, telling Pharaoh, “Israel is my first-born son, and I say to you, ‘Let my son go that he may serve me’ ” (4:22-23, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/li>\n<li>8. The demand of redemption was obedience. On the basis of his deliverance of the Israelites from bondage, God set forth the Ten Commandments (20:1-17) and the rest of the law for them to obey. The people, though quick to pledge their obedience (19:8; 24:3), were even quicker to disobey (32:8). Because the Lord is holy and wants his people to be holy and wholehearted in devotion (34:14), he must punish iniquity. But being compassionate, he also forgives. Throughout the centuries of Israel’s history, God pleaded with his people through the prophets to remember the exodus and repent (see Mi 6:3-4). The faithful responded in gratitude with Moses’ “song of redemption” (Ex 15; cf. Rv 15:3-4).<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<p>The book of Exodus can be divided into four sections, each describing one aspect of God’s dealings with the Israelites during the 15th century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Unveiling (Ex 1–6)<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Exodus begins with the 70 descendants of Jacob who joined Joseph in Egypt for the duration of a famine that was afflicting their land (cf. Gn 46–50). After more than a century of prosperity for the Israelites in the land of Goshen, a new dynasty is established in Egypt whose leaders are not friendly toward Israel. In order to stem the rapid growth of the Hebrew people, the Egyptians force them to do hard labor, building storage cities for the pharaoh.<\/p>\n<p>A further command requires all Israelite male children to be killed at birth. The superintendents of the midwives do not comply, however, and God rewards them—not to show his approval of their lie but because they fear and obey God rather than the pharaoh. A new command calls for all male Israelite babies to be drowned in the Nile River. One special child, who escapes when Pharaoh’s daughter has his basket fished out of the Nile, is Moses. Ironically, Moses’ mother is paid by the princess to raise her own child, who grows up in the palace as the princess’s adopted son.<\/p>\n<p>As an adult, Moses chooses to identify with his Hebrew kin, a tribute to the early instruction given him by his godly parents (see Heb 11:24-26). He sets out to liberate Israel from the Egyptians, one man at a time. But he has to flee to Midian, at the eastern edge of the Sinai Peninsula or in Arabia beyond the northern top of the Gulf of Aqaba. Moses marries into the household of Jethro, also named Reuel. Reuel (“friend of God”) is probably the man’s personal name, and Jethro (“excellence”) his title. Because he is called a “priest of Midian” (Ex 2:16), some scholars have maintained a “Kenite hypothesis,” suggesting that Moses adopted the religion of his father-in-law and taught it to the Israelites. But the Bible states that Moses received his religion by a direct revelation from God. Jethro seems to believe only after he sees that God has rescued Israel from the Egyptians (18:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>While their future deliverer is in Midian, the Israelites continue to be oppressed and cry out to God in their misery (2:23-25). God responds by descending to his people. He came down to rescue Israel (3:8). He appears to Moses in a burning bush and identifies himself as the same God who promised the patriarchs a land “flowing with milk and honey” (3:17). Moses will lead the Israelites there, assisted by his brother, Aaron.<\/p>\n<p>Assured that God’s presence and miraculous signs will accompany him, Moses takes his wife Zipporah and his two sons and departs for Egypt. On the way, the Lord meets him and seeks to put him to death (4:24). That is probably the Hebrew way of saying that God strikes him with a mortal illness. Moses, who is going to deliver God’s people, has neglected the sign of the covenant in failing to circumcise one of his sons (Gn 17:14). Moses recovers after the rite is performed and continues on to Egypt, meeting Aaron at Mt Sinai. Their reception by the Israelites is more cordial than that of Pharaoh, who refuses to honor the God who sent Moses. Instead of releasing the Israelites to offer sacrifices to their God in the wilderness, he increases their burdens. The people complain to Moses, and Moses complains to God. God appears again to Moses (Ex 6), reassuring him that Israel will be delivered by divine power. God’s plan is not a failure—he is just beginning to put it into action.<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Deliverance (Ex 7–19)<\/h5>\n<p>Chapters 7–12 record ten plagues with which God afflicts the Egyptians. Even before the first of them, the pharaoh has hardened his heart to defy God (7:13). There are three cycles of three plagues each:<\/p>\n\n<p> The first three plagues affect both the Egyptians and the Israelites; the Israelites are protected from the final six. The Egyptian magicians are able to duplicate the first two plagues, but when the third strikes, they admit, “This is the finger of God” (8:19). After the plague of flies covers the land, the pharaoh offers Moses the first of four compromises, but Moses refuses all of them (8:25-29; 10:8-11, 24-29). The first plagues are merely unpleasant, but the final ones are destructive and inflict much suffering. Since all of the plagues are common to that area, they themselves are not miraculous. The miracle is how the phenomena are multiplied and limited to the land of Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>The nine plagues serve to harden the pharaoh’s heart even more, so God prepares one final stroke. The death of every firstborn male, among both animals and humans, will be the fatal blow. God warns the Israelites to get ready to leave. To avert the death angel, they must put blood from an unblemished yearling male sheep or goat on their doorways. While they are eating the Passover meal, the death angel begins moving through the land of Egypt. In anguish the pharaoh drives the Israelites from the land; the slaves are free at last. Just as he has promised, the Lord goes before the children of Israel in a pillar of cloud by day and of fire by night.<\/p>\n<p>But once again the pharaoh’s heart is hardened and he gives pursuit. God parts the waters of the sea with a great wind. The literal meaning of the name given that body of water is “sea of reeds.” It could refer to any shoreline where the water is sufficiently shallow for such plants to grow (see 1 Kgs 9:26, where the same term refers to the Gulf of Aqaba near Eloth). Whatever the location, there God hands the Egyptians their final defeat. The rescue is complete.<\/p>\n<p>Moses and the Israelites respond with renewed faith in the Lord and with a song of victory and praise (Ex 14:31–15:21). Soon, however, thanksgiving turns into grumbling because of bitter water (15:22-26), lack of meat and bread (16:1-15), and lack of water (17:1-7). In each situation God provides for their need. He also gives them victory over the Amalekites (vv 8-16). As the Israelites approach Mt Sinai, Moses’ family rejoins him, accompanied by Jethro. Jethro now confesses his faith in the God of the Israelites and shares in a fellowship meal with the leaders. He also assists Moses in reorganizing the judicial system, then returns to Midian (ch 18).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites arrive at Mt Sinai, also called Horeb (3:1), and prepare to meet the Lord who has rescued them in fulfillment of his promise to Moses (v 12). The Lord establishes his covenant with Israel, taking them as his own possession, “a kingdom of priests, my holy nation.” They quickly respond, “We will certainly do everything the <span>Lord<\/span> asks of us” (19:5-8, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Instruction (Ex 20–24)<\/h5>\n<p>The God who redeems a people, who literally “buys them back from slavery,” has a right to make certain demands of them. The commandments God gives to Israel at Sinai are not burdensome requirements but protective guidelines for living as God’s people (20:2-3).<\/p>\n<p>The Law (or Torah, meaning “instruction”) revealed at Sinai consists of three parts:<\/p>\n<p>1. The Ten Commandments (ch 20), addressing a person’s relationship to God and other people. Based on God’s nature (and therefore permanent), the Ten Commandments are unique in the history of the nations.<\/p>\n<li>2. The judgments (chs 21–23), social regulations for governing the people as a theocracy, similar in many ways to the law codes of Israel’s neighbors.<\/li>\n<li>3. Ordinances (chs 24–31) regulating religious ceremonies.<\/li>\n<p>All of the laws are given to Moses during the weeks he spends with God on the mountain.<\/p>\n<p>The Ten Commandments form the basis of all other laws in Israel (20:1-17). The first five deal with honoring the Lord, the second five with respecting one’s neighbor. The last commandment deals with one’s thoughts and intentions rather than with specific actions. It thus forms a safeguard against all sins not included in the first nine.<\/p>\n<p>The judgments recorded in chapters 21–23 deal with master-slave relationships (21:1-11), offenses punishable by death (vv 12-17), compensation for injury to persons or damage to property (21:18–22:15), various interpersonal relationships (22:16–23:9), and Sabbaths, feasts, and the offering of firstfruits (23:10-19). Many of the judgments would not take effect until Israel settled in the Promised Land. Accordingly, that section of the Law closes with a solemn warning against being rebellious and adopting pagan ways. It also contains a bright promise that God will drive out Israel’s enemies, protect his people from sickness, and grant them prosperity, if they obey the Lord’s commands (23:22).<\/p>\n<p>Exodus 24 records a reaffirmation of the covenant between God and Israel, as Moses seals it with the blood of a sacrifice. In response, God appears to the leaders of the people, giving them a glimpse of his splendor. Then Moses ascends the mountain one more time to receive the stone tablets containing the commandments, as well as further instructions regarding the meeting tent (tabernacle), the priesthood, and worship.<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Presence with his People (Ex 25–40)<\/h5>\n<p>After the Lord redeemed the Israelites, he told Moses, “I will make you my own special people, and I will be your God. And you will know that I am the <span>Lord<\/span> your God who has rescued you from your slavery in Egypt” (6:7, <span>nlt<\/span>). Moses had seen that wonderful promise fulfilled, yet one further step remained: “I want the people of Israel to build me a sacred residence where I can live among them” (25:8). God’s dwelling among his people is possible because God had descended to deliver the people and because they had pledged to meet his demands. God calls for a contribution from all whose hearts were willing to give, and he shows Moses a detailed pattern of the tabernacle and its furniture. Aaron and his sons are set apart to serve in the tent. Stipulations for the various offerings, including the Day of Atonement, are given. God tells Moses that he has chosen Bezalel and Oholiab to build the tabernacle and to craft its furnishings, having filled them with his Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>In the meantime the Israelites, who so recently promised total obedience, grow impatient as Moses lingers for 40 days on the mountain. They demand that Aaron make an idol for them. Under pressure, Aaron complies and forms a molten calf, a representation of a pagan deity (32:4).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord informs Moses of the people’s idolatry, revelry, and immorality and says that he is angry enough to destroy all of them and start again with Moses’ offspring. Moses pleads for Israel until the Lord relents, then descends from the mountain to punish the people. Moses pleads again for forgiveness for Israel, and God in mercy pardons their terrible sin (34:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Once more God offers to make a covenant with the people (34:10). Moses spends another 40 days with the Lord, writing the commandments on tablets to replace those smashed when he saw the golden calf. When he returns to the people, his face shines from being in God’s presence, and he must keep it veiled.<\/p>\n<p>Now that Israel has been restored to God’s favor, the construction of the tabernacle can begin. The contributions are so generous that Moses must restrain the people from bringing any more. Finally, all is ready. Moses examines the tabernacle, and it is erected on the first day of the first month, nearly a year after the first Passover. The priests are consecrated, the lamps are lit, and the first burnt sacrifice is offered. A cloud descends, filling the tabernacle with the glory of the Lord. God dwells among his people, the goal of redemption has been attained, and the drama of the book of Exodus has come to an end.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Chronology of the Bible (Old Testament); Egypt, Egyptian; Exodus, The; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Israel, History of; Moses; Plagues upon Egypt; Tabernacle; Temple; Commandments, The Ten.<\/p>","summary_ro":"EXODUS, Book of Second book of the Bible, containing the story of God’s liberation of the people of Israel from slavery in Egypt. Few books of the OT are as important historically and theologically as the book of Exodus. Historically, the exodus event was the birth of Israel as a nation. At Mt Sinai a group of tribes who were descendants of Abraham became a nation ruled by God. The book of Exodus explains how the Israelites were able to resettle the land God had promised to Abraham and gives ...","summary_en":"EXODUS, Book of Second book of the Bible, containing the story of God’s liberation of the people of Israel from slavery in Egypt. Few books of the OT are as important historically and theologically as the book of Exodus. Historically, the exodus event was the birth of Israel as a nation. At Mt Sinai a group of tribes who were descendants of Abraham became a nation ruled by God. The book of Exodus explains how the Israelites were able to resettle the land God had promised to Abraham and gives ...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":13185,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Galilee","title_en":"Galilee","content_ro":"<h3>GALILEE<\/h3>\n<p>Area in northern Palestine that, in Israel’s earlier history, had boundaries that were not clearly defined but that became more precisely defined in the period of Roman rule. The English name Galilee comes from two Hebrew words meaning “circuit” or “district.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalBackground\">Historical Background<\/p>\n<p>In OT times Galilee was not significant in Israelite life, but in NT times it was a prominent Jewish population center. Galilee is first mentioned in the Bible as the location of Kedesh, a city of refuge in the hill country of Naphtali (Jos 20:7; cf. 21:32; 1 Chr 6:76).<\/p>\n<p>Galilee originally designated the area occupied by the tribes of Naphtali, Zebulun (Is 9:1), and possibly Asher (if Cabul in Jos 19:27 is the same city as in 1 Kgs 9:11-13). None of those tribes was able to completely expel the original Canaanite inhabitants (Jgs 1:30-33; 2:1-4), and as a result, Galilee tended to be racially mixed. The cities that King Solomon gave to Hiram, gentile king of Tyre, were within Galilee (1 Kgs 9:11), and the gentile intermixture in that area may have influenced Solomon’s choice of those cities for a gift. This racially mixed condition is also the probable basis for the designation in Isaiah 9:1, “Galilee of the nations” (cf. Mt 4:15; 1 Macc 5:15).<\/p>\n<p>During the monarchy, Galilee was a buffer zone between Israel and Syria, and it bore the brunt of Syrian invasions against Israel. This fact is cited by the prophet Isaiah (Is 9:1), but he saw it as the prelude to a brighter day when the messianic king would reign. Galilee was conquered by Syrian King Ben-hadad (1 Kgs 15:20) and was probably recovered by Israel’s King Ahab. Galilee was later subjugated by the Arameans under Hazael (2 Kgs 10:32; 12:18; 13:22) and regained by Jeroboam II (2 Kgs 14:23-25). As a result of Assyrian conquests in the area of Damascus and Galilee in 732 <span>BC<\/span> by Tiglath-pileser III (2 Kgs 15:29), more Gentiles were imported into the area while many of the Jewish inhabitants were deported. This naturally led to greater gentile influence and domination in Galilee. Under the successive influence of Babylonia, Persia, Greece, and Syria, Galilee was constantly experiencing infiltration and migration. From the time of the Assyrian conquest of Israel to about the end of the second century <span>BC<\/span>, Galilee’s population was dominated by Gentiles, with only a few Jews.<\/p>\n<p>The Jews remaining in Galilee were brought to Judea by Simon Maccabeus in 164 <span>BC<\/span> (1 Macc 5:21-23). Galilee was conquered by Aristobulus I (104–103 <span>BC<\/span>), who forced the inhabitants to be circumcised and to submit to Jewish laws, a work that probably already had been initiated by John Hyrcanus (134–104 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n\n<p>Herod the Great (ruler under Rome, 37–4 <span>BC<\/span>) affixed Galilee to his kingdom, and more Jews were attracted there. Josephus recorded that Galilee had 240 cities and villages and 100,000 men available to fight against the Romans. After the death of Herod the Great, Galilee was included in the tetrarchy of Herod Antipas (4 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 39). With the banishment of Herod Antipas in <span>AD<\/span> 39, Galilee was added to the territory of Herod Agrippa I, who ruled it until he died in <span>AD<\/span> 44. Rome directly administered Galilee until it was put under the rule of Herod Agrippa II. By siding with the Romans during the Jewish revolts, he was able to retain his position until <span>AD<\/span> 100. In spite of the Galileans’ attempt to gain independence, the revolutionary faction was brought under subjection by Vespasian in <span>AD<\/span> 67. After Herod Agrippa II’s death, Galilee became part of the Roman province of Syria.<\/p>\n<p>Following the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Sanhedrin and many other Jews of southern Palestine flocked to Galilee. As a result, such cities as Tiberias and Sepphoris became Jewish, and the dispersed Jews came to think of Galilee as their center. Tiberias became a center for Jewish learning, and it was there that such major contributions as the Tiberian system of vowel pointing the Hebrew consonantal text were made, as well as the formulation of the Mishnah and the Palestinian Talmud.<\/p>\n<p>From about <span>AD<\/span> 451 until the Muslim rule over Galilee began in the seventh century, Galilee was governed by the Christian patriarchate of Jerusalem, set up by the Council of Chalcedon in <span>AD<\/span> 451. Muslim rule from the seventh century on was continuous except for the intervals caused by the twelfth-century Crusades and World War I. All of Galilee has been included in the modern state of Israel since its establishment in 1948.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Boundaries\">Boundaries<\/p>\n<p>Galilee was bounded on the east by the upper Jordan River and the Sea of Galilee and on the south by the plain of Esdraelon, which served as a natural boundary between Galilee and Samaria. At times the plain was included in Galilee, as it was during the intertestamental period (1 Macc 10:30; 12:47-49). While the northern boundary was uncertain and variable during Galilee’s history, in NT times it reached to Lake Huleh. The western boundary followed the Mediterranean Sea to Mt Carmel.<\/p>\n<p>From the time of the divided kingdom until the Assyrian conquest of Galilee (734 <span>BC<\/span>), it was the northernmost part of the kingdom of Israel. The area was divided into upper Galilee and lower Galilee by the plain of Ramah, which ran between Capernaum and Ptolemais (cf. Jdt 1:8; 1 Macc 12:49; Josephus’s <em>War<\/em> 3.3.1). In the Mishnah (compilation of early rabbinical interpretation of the Law), Galilee is divided into three parts corresponding to the natural divisions of plain, hill country, and mountain. Under Roman rule, Galilee was about 25 to 30 miles (40 to 50 kilometers) from east to west and about 35 to 40 miles (55 to 65 kilometers) from north to south.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Geography\">Geography<\/p>\n<p>The attractive Galilean landscape is made up of volcanic limestone hills and fertile alluvial plains. Its climate is cooler than that of any other part of Palestine, and its beauty and fertility contrast sharply with the barren, sun-baked hills of southern Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>The physical features range from the high mountains in the north to the plain of Esdraelon in the south. Mt Tabor is prominent on the east, while Mt Carmel stands out on the west. Much of upper Galilee is 3,000 feet (914.4 meters) above sea level, and in NT times it was largely forested and less densely inhabited than lower Galilee. Lower Galilee starts at 1,500 to 2,000 feet (450 to 600 meters) above sea level and descends sharply to the Sea of Galilee, more than 600 feet (182.9 meters) below sea level.<\/p>\n<p>Besides the average annual rainfall of 25 inches (63.5 centimeters), Galilee is watered by the streams that flow from springs in the hills and are the main sources of the beautiful Kishon River at Janin, and the headwaters of the Jordan River, the largest river in Palestine. The ground is also moistened by heavy dews resulting from climatic conditions created by the Lebanon mountain range to the north.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Cities\">Cities<\/p>\n<p>Among the more notable cities in Galilee’s early history were Kedesh in Naphtali, a city of refuge (Jos 20:7; 21:32; 1 Chr 6:76), and Hazor, about 10 miles (16.1 kilometers) north of the Sea of Galilee (Jos 11:10; 1 Kgs 9:15). During the time of Christ, Chorazin (Mt 11:21) and Capernaum (4:13; 11:23) were prominent cities located in the northeast near the Sea of Galilee. Capernaum seems to have been a center for Jesus’ ministry in the area (Mt 4:13; Mk 2:1; 9:33; etc.). Nazareth is especially significant as the city of Christ’s childhood (Mt 2:22-23; Lk 2:39; 4:16; etc.). Nain (Lk 7:11-17), located on the northern edge of the mountain now called Little Hermon, and Cana of Galilee (Jn 2:1-11) also figured prominently in Christ’s ministry. Sepphoris and Tiberias were important cities during Roman administration.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RoadsandTravel\">Roads and Travel<\/p>\n<p>Many roads traversed Galilee, and those in NT times were superior due to Roman construction and maintenance.<\/p>\n<p>Among the best-known trade routes was the Via Maris (the Way of the Sea), which ran through Galilee on its way from Damascus to Egypt. Another main road ran from Tiberias, near the Sea of Galilee, to Acco (Ptolemais), a port on the Phoenician coast. Major caravan routes also connected Galilee with the markets of the East. The area was tied together by a network of spurs and connecting roads that branched from the main highways.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Inhabitants\">Inhabitants<\/p>\n<p>The occupants of Galilee (Galileans) were basically Jewish in religious and patriotic orientation, but they were composed of various ethnic elements. The influence of this mixture was sufficient to cause recognizable differences in speech from that of southern Palestine (cf. Mt 26:69, 73). The Galileans absorbed more Greek and Roman influences than did the Judean Jews. The racial mixture, differences in speech, and location caused Judean Jews to view Galilee and its inhabitants with contempt (Jn 1:46; 7:41, 52).<\/p>\n<p>Lower Galilee was densely settled with villages, and in NT times the population was probably about three million. The fertility of the soil and resultant fruitfulness of the country produced a prosperous Jewish populace, particularly in the centuries immediately after the time of Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Government\">Government<\/p>\n<p>Galilee was under the Roman rule of emperors Augustus and Tiberius during the time of Christ. Roman fortifications throughout Galilee were a constant reminder of the presence and influence of the Roman Empire. During Christ’s ministry, Rome installed the tetrarch Herod Antipas (Mt 14:1; Lk 23:5-7) to rule the territory. He was appointed to office when 17 years old. Sepphoris was his first capital; in about <span>AD<\/span> 22 he built Tiberias on the shore of the Sea of Galilee as his new capital, in honor of the emperor.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Products\">Products<\/p>\n<p>Abundant crops enabled Galilee to provide produce for the neighboring Phoenician cities of Tyre and Sidon around the middle of the first century <span>AD<\/span>. Main crops included grapes, pomegranates, olives, and grains. Fishing in the Sea of Galilee was a prominent business in NT times (Mk 1:14-20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusandGalilee\">Jesus and Galilee<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was raised in Galilee (Lk 4:16), and 11 of his 12 disciples were from there (Judas Iscariot was the only Judean).<\/p>\n<p>The culture, commerce, farming, and fishing business of the area formed the background for much of Jesus’ ministry, as his parables show (Mt 20:1-8; 21:33; Mk 4:3; Lk 13:6-9). The first three Gospels are largely occupied with Christ’s ministry in Galilee, with much of it being spent around the Sea of Galilee. Most of his parables (19 of 32) were spoken here, and the vast majority of his miracles (25 of 33) were performed in Galilee. Jesus received his greatest response in this region. The Sermon on the Mount was spoken in Galilee, and one of its mountains was the scene of the Lord’s transfiguration. Many of the women who followed Christ and ministered to him also came from there (Mt 27:55). Two of Christ’s most significant postresurrection appearances took place in Galilee (Mt 28:16-20; Jn 21:1-23), and one of Christ’s own titles, Jesus of Nazareth (Jn 1:45), identified him as a Galilean.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Galileans\">Galileans<\/p>\n<p>Since Jesus and most of the 12 disciples were from Galilee, it was natural for the term to be applied to all of his followers, especially since it implied that the movement was not as pure as Judean Judaism. Some interpreters believe that Luke 22:59 is an example of the use of “Galilean” as a title; in Acts 1:11 and 2:7 it is merely a geographical reference. One sure reference to Christians by that title appears in the work of the pagan philosopher Epictetus (<span>AD<\/span> 50?–135?), who was impressed with how Christians died for their faith. It is not clear how common the title of Galilean was, but it had obviously spread from Judea to Rome, where Epictetus lived.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Palestine; Sea of Galilee.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GALILEE<\/h3>\n<p>Area in northern Palestine that, in Israel’s earlier history, had boundaries that were not clearly defined but that became more precisely defined in the period of Roman rule. The English name Galilee comes from two Hebrew words meaning “circuit” or “district.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalBackground\">Historical Background<\/p>\n<p>In OT times Galilee was not significant in Israelite life, but in NT times it was a prominent Jewish population center. Galilee is first mentioned in the Bible as the location of Kedesh, a city of refuge in the hill country of Naphtali (Jos 20:7; cf. 21:32; 1 Chr 6:76).<\/p>\n<p>Galilee originally designated the area occupied by the tribes of Naphtali, Zebulun (Is 9:1), and possibly Asher (if Cabul in Jos 19:27 is the same city as in 1 Kgs 9:11-13). None of those tribes was able to completely expel the original Canaanite inhabitants (Jgs 1:30-33; 2:1-4), and as a result, Galilee tended to be racially mixed. The cities that King Solomon gave to Hiram, gentile king of Tyre, were within Galilee (1 Kgs 9:11), and the gentile intermixture in that area may have influenced Solomon’s choice of those cities for a gift. This racially mixed condition is also the probable basis for the designation in Isaiah 9:1, “Galilee of the nations” (cf. Mt 4:15; 1 Macc 5:15).<\/p>\n<p>During the monarchy, Galilee was a buffer zone between Israel and Syria, and it bore the brunt of Syrian invasions against Israel. This fact is cited by the prophet Isaiah (Is 9:1), but he saw it as the prelude to a brighter day when the messianic king would reign. Galilee was conquered by Syrian King Ben-hadad (1 Kgs 15:20) and was probably recovered by Israel’s King Ahab. Galilee was later subjugated by the Arameans under Hazael (2 Kgs 10:32; 12:18; 13:22) and regained by Jeroboam II (2 Kgs 14:23-25). As a result of Assyrian conquests in the area of Damascus and Galilee in 732 <span>BC<\/span> by Tiglath-pileser III (2 Kgs 15:29), more Gentiles were imported into the area while many of the Jewish inhabitants were deported. This naturally led to greater gentile influence and domination in Galilee. Under the successive influence of Babylonia, Persia, Greece, and Syria, Galilee was constantly experiencing infiltration and migration. From the time of the Assyrian conquest of Israel to about the end of the second century <span>BC<\/span>, Galilee’s population was dominated by Gentiles, with only a few Jews.<\/p>\n<p>The Jews remaining in Galilee were brought to Judea by Simon Maccabeus in 164 <span>BC<\/span> (1 Macc 5:21-23). Galilee was conquered by Aristobulus I (104–103 <span>BC<\/span>), who forced the inhabitants to be circumcised and to submit to Jewish laws, a work that probably already had been initiated by John Hyrcanus (134–104 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n\n<p>Herod the Great (ruler under Rome, 37–4 <span>BC<\/span>) affixed Galilee to his kingdom, and more Jews were attracted there. Josephus recorded that Galilee had 240 cities and villages and 100,000 men available to fight against the Romans. After the death of Herod the Great, Galilee was included in the tetrarchy of Herod Antipas (4 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 39). With the banishment of Herod Antipas in <span>AD<\/span> 39, Galilee was added to the territory of Herod Agrippa I, who ruled it until he died in <span>AD<\/span> 44. Rome directly administered Galilee until it was put under the rule of Herod Agrippa II. By siding with the Romans during the Jewish revolts, he was able to retain his position until <span>AD<\/span> 100. In spite of the Galileans’ attempt to gain independence, the revolutionary faction was brought under subjection by Vespasian in <span>AD<\/span> 67. After Herod Agrippa II’s death, Galilee became part of the Roman province of Syria.<\/p>\n<p>Following the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Sanhedrin and many other Jews of southern Palestine flocked to Galilee. As a result, such cities as Tiberias and Sepphoris became Jewish, and the dispersed Jews came to think of Galilee as their center. Tiberias became a center for Jewish learning, and it was there that such major contributions as the Tiberian system of vowel pointing the Hebrew consonantal text were made, as well as the formulation of the Mishnah and the Palestinian Talmud.<\/p>\n<p>From about <span>AD<\/span> 451 until the Muslim rule over Galilee began in the seventh century, Galilee was governed by the Christian patriarchate of Jerusalem, set up by the Council of Chalcedon in <span>AD<\/span> 451. Muslim rule from the seventh century on was continuous except for the intervals caused by the twelfth-century Crusades and World War I. All of Galilee has been included in the modern state of Israel since its establishment in 1948.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Boundaries\">Boundaries<\/p>\n<p>Galilee was bounded on the east by the upper Jordan River and the Sea of Galilee and on the south by the plain of Esdraelon, which served as a natural boundary between Galilee and Samaria. At times the plain was included in Galilee, as it was during the intertestamental period (1 Macc 10:30; 12:47-49). While the northern boundary was uncertain and variable during Galilee’s history, in NT times it reached to Lake Huleh. The western boundary followed the Mediterranean Sea to Mt Carmel.<\/p>\n<p>From the time of the divided kingdom until the Assyrian conquest of Galilee (734 <span>BC<\/span>), it was the northernmost part of the kingdom of Israel. The area was divided into upper Galilee and lower Galilee by the plain of Ramah, which ran between Capernaum and Ptolemais (cf. Jdt 1:8; 1 Macc 12:49; Josephus’s <em>War<\/em> 3.3.1). In the Mishnah (compilation of early rabbinical interpretation of the Law), Galilee is divided into three parts corresponding to the natural divisions of plain, hill country, and mountain. Under Roman rule, Galilee was about 25 to 30 miles (40 to 50 kilometers) from east to west and about 35 to 40 miles (55 to 65 kilometers) from north to south.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Geography\">Geography<\/p>\n<p>The attractive Galilean landscape is made up of volcanic limestone hills and fertile alluvial plains. Its climate is cooler than that of any other part of Palestine, and its beauty and fertility contrast sharply with the barren, sun-baked hills of southern Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>The physical features range from the high mountains in the north to the plain of Esdraelon in the south. Mt Tabor is prominent on the east, while Mt Carmel stands out on the west. Much of upper Galilee is 3,000 feet (914.4 meters) above sea level, and in NT times it was largely forested and less densely inhabited than lower Galilee. Lower Galilee starts at 1,500 to 2,000 feet (450 to 600 meters) above sea level and descends sharply to the Sea of Galilee, more than 600 feet (182.9 meters) below sea level.<\/p>\n<p>Besides the average annual rainfall of 25 inches (63.5 centimeters), Galilee is watered by the streams that flow from springs in the hills and are the main sources of the beautiful Kishon River at Janin, and the headwaters of the Jordan River, the largest river in Palestine. The ground is also moistened by heavy dews resulting from climatic conditions created by the Lebanon mountain range to the north.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Cities\">Cities<\/p>\n<p>Among the more notable cities in Galilee’s early history were Kedesh in Naphtali, a city of refuge (Jos 20:7; 21:32; 1 Chr 6:76), and Hazor, about 10 miles (16.1 kilometers) north of the Sea of Galilee (Jos 11:10; 1 Kgs 9:15). During the time of Christ, Chorazin (Mt 11:21) and Capernaum (4:13; 11:23) were prominent cities located in the northeast near the Sea of Galilee. Capernaum seems to have been a center for Jesus’ ministry in the area (Mt 4:13; Mk 2:1; 9:33; etc.). Nazareth is especially significant as the city of Christ’s childhood (Mt 2:22-23; Lk 2:39; 4:16; etc.). Nain (Lk 7:11-17), located on the northern edge of the mountain now called Little Hermon, and Cana of Galilee (Jn 2:1-11) also figured prominently in Christ’s ministry. Sepphoris and Tiberias were important cities during Roman administration.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RoadsandTravel\">Roads and Travel<\/p>\n<p>Many roads traversed Galilee, and those in NT times were superior due to Roman construction and maintenance.<\/p>\n<p>Among the best-known trade routes was the Via Maris (the Way of the Sea), which ran through Galilee on its way from Damascus to Egypt. Another main road ran from Tiberias, near the Sea of Galilee, to Acco (Ptolemais), a port on the Phoenician coast. Major caravan routes also connected Galilee with the markets of the East. The area was tied together by a network of spurs and connecting roads that branched from the main highways.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Inhabitants\">Inhabitants<\/p>\n<p>The occupants of Galilee (Galileans) were basically Jewish in religious and patriotic orientation, but they were composed of various ethnic elements. The influence of this mixture was sufficient to cause recognizable differences in speech from that of southern Palestine (cf. Mt 26:69, 73). The Galileans absorbed more Greek and Roman influences than did the Judean Jews. The racial mixture, differences in speech, and location caused Judean Jews to view Galilee and its inhabitants with contempt (Jn 1:46; 7:41, 52).<\/p>\n<p>Lower Galilee was densely settled with villages, and in NT times the population was probably about three million. The fertility of the soil and resultant fruitfulness of the country produced a prosperous Jewish populace, particularly in the centuries immediately after the time of Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Government\">Government<\/p>\n<p>Galilee was under the Roman rule of emperors Augustus and Tiberius during the time of Christ. Roman fortifications throughout Galilee were a constant reminder of the presence and influence of the Roman Empire. During Christ’s ministry, Rome installed the tetrarch Herod Antipas (Mt 14:1; Lk 23:5-7) to rule the territory. He was appointed to office when 17 years old. Sepphoris was his first capital; in about <span>AD<\/span> 22 he built Tiberias on the shore of the Sea of Galilee as his new capital, in honor of the emperor.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Products\">Products<\/p>\n<p>Abundant crops enabled Galilee to provide produce for the neighboring Phoenician cities of Tyre and Sidon around the middle of the first century <span>AD<\/span>. Main crops included grapes, pomegranates, olives, and grains. Fishing in the Sea of Galilee was a prominent business in NT times (Mk 1:14-20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusandGalilee\">Jesus and Galilee<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was raised in Galilee (Lk 4:16), and 11 of his 12 disciples were from there (Judas Iscariot was the only Judean).<\/p>\n<p>The culture, commerce, farming, and fishing business of the area formed the background for much of Jesus’ ministry, as his parables show (Mt 20:1-8; 21:33; Mk 4:3; Lk 13:6-9). The first three Gospels are largely occupied with Christ’s ministry in Galilee, with much of it being spent around the Sea of Galilee. Most of his parables (19 of 32) were spoken here, and the vast majority of his miracles (25 of 33) were performed in Galilee. Jesus received his greatest response in this region. The Sermon on the Mount was spoken in Galilee, and one of its mountains was the scene of the Lord’s transfiguration. Many of the women who followed Christ and ministered to him also came from there (Mt 27:55). Two of Christ’s most significant postresurrection appearances took place in Galilee (Mt 28:16-20; Jn 21:1-23), and one of Christ’s own titles, Jesus of Nazareth (Jn 1:45), identified him as a Galilean.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Galileans\">Galileans<\/p>\n<p>Since Jesus and most of the 12 disciples were from Galilee, it was natural for the term to be applied to all of his followers, especially since it implied that the movement was not as pure as Judean Judaism. Some interpreters believe that Luke 22:59 is an example of the use of “Galilean” as a title; in Acts 1:11 and 2:7 it is merely a geographical reference. One sure reference to Christians by that title appears in the work of the pagan philosopher Epictetus (<span>AD<\/span> 50?–135?), who was impressed with how Christians died for their faith. It is not clear how common the title of Galilean was, but it had obviously spread from Judea to Rome, where Epictetus lived.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Palestine; Sea of Galilee.<\/p>","summary_ro":"GALILEE Area in northern Palestine that, in Israel’s earlier history, had boundaries that were not clearly defined but that became more precisely defined in the period of Roman rule. The English name Galilee comes from two Hebrew words meaning “circuit” or “district.” Historical Background In OT times Galilee was not significant in Israelite life, but in NT times it was a prominent Jewish population center. Galilee is first mentioned in the Bible as the location of Kedesh, a city of refuge in...","summary_en":"GALILEE Area in northern Palestine that, in Israel’s earlier history, had boundaries that were not clearly defined but that became more precisely defined in the period of Roman rule. The English name Galilee comes from two Hebrew words meaning “circuit” or “district.” Historical Background In OT times Galilee was not significant in Israelite life, but in NT times it was a prominent Jewish population center. Galilee is first mentioned in the Bible as the location of Kedesh, a city of refuge in...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20584,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Joseph","title_en":"Joseph","content_ro":"<h3>JOSEPH<\/h3>\n<li>1. Jacob’s 11th son and the firstborn son of Rachel. Rachel named the boy Joseph, meaning “may he add,” expressing her desire that God would give her another son (Gn 30:24).<\/li>\n<p>Nothing more is said about Joseph until, at the age of 17, he is seen tending his father’s flocks with his brothers (Gn 37:2). Joseph was the favorite of his father, since he was the son of his old age (v 3) and the firstborn son of his favorite wife. Because of this, his brothers hated Joseph. This envy was magnified when Jacob gave Joseph a ground-length, long-sleeved, multicolored robe (vv 3-4). (This type of garment is illustrated by the paintings in the Asiatic tombs of Khnumhotep II at Beni Hasan and of the nobles at Gurneh, near Luxor.) The animosity of his brothers increased still more when Joseph revealed to them his dreams of dominion over them (vv 5-11). Subsequently, when Joseph was sent to check on his brothers and the flocks near Shechem, his brothers sold him to a caravan of traders going down to Egypt (vv 25-28). His brothers then took his robe, dipped it in goat’s blood, and brought it to Jacob, who concluded that Joseph had been killed by wild animals (vv 31-33); Jacob was overwhelmed with grief (vv 34-35).<\/p>\n<p>In Egypt, Joseph was sold to Potiphar, an Egyptian officer of the guard (Gn 37:36; 39:1), who eventually put Joseph in charge of his entire household. However, trouble arose from Potiphar’s wife, who was attracted to the young Hebrew and tried to seduce him (39:6-10). He steadfastly resisted her advances, protesting that to comply with her wishes would be a disservice to his master and a sin against God (v 9). One day she seized his garment, but he left the garment behind and fled. Potiphar’s wife accused Joseph of attempted rape; her report was believed, and Joseph was incarcerated in the king’s prison (v 20), where Pharaoh’s butler and baker were also confined. While in prison, Joseph, with the Lord’s help, interpreted these men’s troublesome dreams. As Joseph had foretold, the baker was executed and the butler was restored to royal favor (ch 40).<\/p>\n<p>Two years later Pharaoh had two dreams that his magicians and wise men could not interpret. The butler, remembering Joseph, had him summoned from prison. God revealed to Joseph that the dreams foretold seven years of abundance, followed by seven years of famine (Gn 41:25-36). Pharaoh, impressed with Joseph’s interpretation, made him ruler of Egypt, second only to himself (vv 39-44). Joseph was given a new name, Zaphenath-paneah, and a wife, Asenath, the daughter of Potiphera (v 45).<\/p>\n<p>Joseph was 30 years old when he became ruler of Egypt. During the seven years of prosperity, he gathered the good supplies for the seven years of famine to come (Gn 41:53-56). When the famine eventually became severe in Palestine, Jacob sent all his sons, except Benjamin, his youngest son, to Egypt to purchase grain. Appearing before Joseph in Egypt, they did not recognize him. But he knew them and remembered his dreams of years before (42:8-9). After listening to the report of their family, he accused them of being spies (vv 9-14) and insisted that they leave one of their brothers as hostage and return with Benjamin to verify the truthfulness of their report (vv 19-20). Thus Simeon was bound and left in Egypt (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>After the famine worsened in Palestine, Jacob asked his sons to go back to Egypt to buy more grain (Gn 43:1-2); reluctantly agreeing to the conditions that the Egyptian administrator had placed on them, Jacob allowed Benjamin to go with them (vv 11-13). When they arrived in Egypt, they were taken to Joseph’s house, where Simeon was restored to them (v 23) and a meal was prepared for them (v 33). Joseph at last disclosed his identity and declared that God had sent him before them to preserve their lives (45:4-8). Arrangements were then made to send for Jacob; wagons were provided, along with provisions for the journey (v 21). When Jacob came to Goshen in the Nile Delta, Joseph went out to meet him, and another great reunion took place (46:28-29). He also presented his father and brothers to Pharaoh, who let them live in the land of Goshen (47:6).<\/p>\n<p>Upon learning that his father was ill, Joseph took his two sons, Manasseh and Ephraim, to him for his blessing. He presented the sons so that the older would be at Jacob’s right hand and the younger at his left in order that Manasseh would receive the blessing of the firstborn. Jacob, however, crossed his hands and with his right hand on Ephraim gave him the greater blessing (Gn 48:14-20). He also gave to Joseph the land that he had taken from the Amorites (v 22). At Jacob’s death, Joseph made the funeral arrangements; and after the customary funerary practices were carried out, a great funeral procession went to Canaan, where Jacob was buried by his sons in the cave of Machpelah near Hebron (50:1-12).<\/p>\n<p>When Joseph was 110 years old, he called his brothers and told them that he was about to die. He made them take an oath that when they returned to Canaan they would take his bones with them. So he died, was embalmed, and was placed in a coffin in Egypt (Gn 50:26). Many years later, during the exodus, Moses took the bones of Joseph with him from Egypt (Ex 13:19). Joseph’s remains were eventually interred at Shechem in the parcel of land that Jacob had bought from Hamor, the father of Shechem (Gn 33:18-20; Jos 24:32). <em>See<\/em> Israel, History of; Patriarchs, Period of the.<\/p>\n<li>2. Igal’s father from Issachar’s tribe. Igal was one of the 12 spies sent by Moses to search out the land of Canaan (Nm 13:7).<\/li>\n<li>3. Asaph’s second son and the leader of the first course of priests serving in the sanctuary during David’s reign (1 Chr 25:2, 9).<\/li>\n<li>4. One of Binnui’s descendants who was encouraged by Ezra to divorce his foreign wife during the postexilic era (Ezr 10:42).<\/li>\n<li>5. Priest and family leader from Shebaniah’s line during the days of Joiakim, the high priest (Neh 12:14).<\/li>\n<li>6. Descendant of David (Mt 1:16; Lk 3:23) and the husband of Mary, the mother of Jesus. Joseph was betrothed to Mary, a young woman of the city of Nazareth. Mary had learned from the angel Gabriel that she was to bear the Son of God, whom she was to name Jesus (Lk 1:31) and that this conception was to be a work of the Holy Spirit (v 35). Joseph was not aware of this, so when he learned that Mary was pregnant, he decided to divorce her quietly, for he was a just man and did not want to humiliate her publicly (Mt 1:19). An angel subsequently appeared to him in a dream to tell him what was happening (Mt 1:21; cf. Is 7:14). The text of Matthew makes it clear that there was no sexual union between Joseph and Mary until after Jesus was born (Mt 1:18, 25; see also Lk 1:34-37).<\/li>\n<p>When Caesar Augustus issued a decree that everyone had to register in his native city for purposes of taxation, Joseph and Mary returned to Bethlehem, where Jesus was subsequently born (Lk 2:1-6). Later, Joseph and Mary took the infant Jesus to the temple to present him to the Lord (vv 22, 33). After the visit of the wise men, an angel appeared to Joseph in a dream and instructed him to take Jesus and Mary to Egypt to protect the child from King Herod (Mt 2:13). Upon the death of Herod, an angel similarly advised him to return to Israel, so the family went to live in Nazareth. The last recorded event that involves Joseph is the incident of Jesus at the temple at age 12 (Lk 2:41-51). Joseph is not mentioned by name, but Mary told Jesus that she and his father had been looking for him anxiously.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was identified by people around Nazareth as “Joseph’s son” (Lk 4:22; Jn 1:45; 6:42). It is only through references identifying Jesus that we learn of Joseph’s trade. Twice Jesus is referred to as “the carpenter’s son” (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3). Joseph was not a carpenter in our sense of the word, for houses were built mostly of stone and earth. He was a woodworker or artificer in wood, and probably most of his work was with furniture and agricultural implements.<\/p>\n<p>During the ministry of Jesus, it was his mother and his brothers who came to look for him (Mt 12:46-50; Mk 3:31-35), so it is assumed that by this time Joseph was dead. Joseph was most likely the father of James, Joseph, Simon, Judas, and unnamed sisters (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Brothers of Jesus; Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<li>7. Joseph and Mary’s son and the brother of Jesus (Mt 13:55); alternately called Joses in Mark 6:3. <em>See<\/em> Brothers of Jesus.<\/li>\n<li>8. Native of Arimathea and the follower of Jesus who provided for his burial. He was a rich man from the town of Arimathea and a respected member of the Sanhedrin, or council (Mk 15:43). He was a good and righteous man and did not go along with the decision to crucify Jesus (Lk 23:50-51). Joseph had been a secret follower of Jesus because he was afraid of the Jews (Jn 19:38), but after the Crucifixion he took courage and went to Pilate to ask for Jesus’ body. He and Nicodemus took the body, treated it with spices, and wrapped it in linen cloths, according to the Jewish burial customs. In a nearby garden was Joseph’s own new rock-cut tomb in which no one had ever been buried. Here they placed Jesus and sealed the tomb with a large stone.<\/li>\n<li> 9. Mattathias’s son and an ancestor of Jesus (Lk 3:25). <em>See<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/li>\n<li>10. KJV rendering of Josech, an ancestor of Jesus, in Luke 3:26. <em>See<\/em> Josech.<\/li>\n<li>11. Jonam’s son and an ancestor of Jesus (Lk 3:30). <em>See<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/li>\n<li>12. Disciple of Jesus who was “called Barsabbas” and “surnamed Justus” (Acts 1:23). Joseph was one of the candidates put forward by the 11 apostles to replace Judas Iscariot. It was Matthias, however, who was chosen.<\/li>\n<li>13. Cypriot Levite who sold a field and gave the proceeds to the apostles. He was surnamed “Barnabas,” meaning “son of encouragement,” by the apostles (Acts 4:36). <em>See<\/em> Barnabas.<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>JOSEPH<\/h3>\n<li>1. Jacob’s 11th son and the firstborn son of Rachel. Rachel named the boy Joseph, meaning “may he add,” expressing her desire that God would give her another son (Gn 30:24).<\/li>\n<p>Nothing more is said about Joseph until, at the age of 17, he is seen tending his father’s flocks with his brothers (Gn 37:2). Joseph was the favorite of his father, since he was the son of his old age (v 3) and the firstborn son of his favorite wife. Because of this, his brothers hated Joseph. This envy was magnified when Jacob gave Joseph a ground-length, long-sleeved, multicolored robe (vv 3-4). (This type of garment is illustrated by the paintings in the Asiatic tombs of Khnumhotep II at Beni Hasan and of the nobles at Gurneh, near Luxor.) The animosity of his brothers increased still more when Joseph revealed to them his dreams of dominion over them (vv 5-11). Subsequently, when Joseph was sent to check on his brothers and the flocks near Shechem, his brothers sold him to a caravan of traders going down to Egypt (vv 25-28). His brothers then took his robe, dipped it in goat’s blood, and brought it to Jacob, who concluded that Joseph had been killed by wild animals (vv 31-33); Jacob was overwhelmed with grief (vv 34-35).<\/p>\n<p>In Egypt, Joseph was sold to Potiphar, an Egyptian officer of the guard (Gn 37:36; 39:1), who eventually put Joseph in charge of his entire household. However, trouble arose from Potiphar’s wife, who was attracted to the young Hebrew and tried to seduce him (39:6-10). He steadfastly resisted her advances, protesting that to comply with her wishes would be a disservice to his master and a sin against God (v 9). One day she seized his garment, but he left the garment behind and fled. Potiphar’s wife accused Joseph of attempted rape; her report was believed, and Joseph was incarcerated in the king’s prison (v 20), where Pharaoh’s butler and baker were also confined. While in prison, Joseph, with the Lord’s help, interpreted these men’s troublesome dreams. As Joseph had foretold, the baker was executed and the butler was restored to royal favor (ch 40).<\/p>\n<p>Two years later Pharaoh had two dreams that his magicians and wise men could not interpret. The butler, remembering Joseph, had him summoned from prison. God revealed to Joseph that the dreams foretold seven years of abundance, followed by seven years of famine (Gn 41:25-36). Pharaoh, impressed with Joseph’s interpretation, made him ruler of Egypt, second only to himself (vv 39-44). Joseph was given a new name, Zaphenath-paneah, and a wife, Asenath, the daughter of Potiphera (v 45).<\/p>\n<p>Joseph was 30 years old when he became ruler of Egypt. During the seven years of prosperity, he gathered the good supplies for the seven years of famine to come (Gn 41:53-56). When the famine eventually became severe in Palestine, Jacob sent all his sons, except Benjamin, his youngest son, to Egypt to purchase grain. Appearing before Joseph in Egypt, they did not recognize him. But he knew them and remembered his dreams of years before (42:8-9). After listening to the report of their family, he accused them of being spies (vv 9-14) and insisted that they leave one of their brothers as hostage and return with Benjamin to verify the truthfulness of their report (vv 19-20). Thus Simeon was bound and left in Egypt (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>After the famine worsened in Palestine, Jacob asked his sons to go back to Egypt to buy more grain (Gn 43:1-2); reluctantly agreeing to the conditions that the Egyptian administrator had placed on them, Jacob allowed Benjamin to go with them (vv 11-13). When they arrived in Egypt, they were taken to Joseph’s house, where Simeon was restored to them (v 23) and a meal was prepared for them (v 33). Joseph at last disclosed his identity and declared that God had sent him before them to preserve their lives (45:4-8). Arrangements were then made to send for Jacob; wagons were provided, along with provisions for the journey (v 21). When Jacob came to Goshen in the Nile Delta, Joseph went out to meet him, and another great reunion took place (46:28-29). He also presented his father and brothers to Pharaoh, who let them live in the land of Goshen (47:6).<\/p>\n<p>Upon learning that his father was ill, Joseph took his two sons, Manasseh and Ephraim, to him for his blessing. He presented the sons so that the older would be at Jacob’s right hand and the younger at his left in order that Manasseh would receive the blessing of the firstborn. Jacob, however, crossed his hands and with his right hand on Ephraim gave him the greater blessing (Gn 48:14-20). He also gave to Joseph the land that he had taken from the Amorites (v 22). At Jacob’s death, Joseph made the funeral arrangements; and after the customary funerary practices were carried out, a great funeral procession went to Canaan, where Jacob was buried by his sons in the cave of Machpelah near Hebron (50:1-12).<\/p>\n<p>When Joseph was 110 years old, he called his brothers and told them that he was about to die. He made them take an oath that when they returned to Canaan they would take his bones with them. So he died, was embalmed, and was placed in a coffin in Egypt (Gn 50:26). Many years later, during the exodus, Moses took the bones of Joseph with him from Egypt (Ex 13:19). Joseph’s remains were eventually interred at Shechem in the parcel of land that Jacob had bought from Hamor, the father of Shechem (Gn 33:18-20; Jos 24:32). <em>See<\/em> Israel, History of; Patriarchs, Period of the.<\/p>\n<li>2. Igal’s father from Issachar’s tribe. Igal was one of the 12 spies sent by Moses to search out the land of Canaan (Nm 13:7).<\/li>\n<li>3. Asaph’s second son and the leader of the first course of priests serving in the sanctuary during David’s reign (1 Chr 25:2, 9).<\/li>\n<li>4. One of Binnui’s descendants who was encouraged by Ezra to divorce his foreign wife during the postexilic era (Ezr 10:42).<\/li>\n<li>5. Priest and family leader from Shebaniah’s line during the days of Joiakim, the high priest (Neh 12:14).<\/li>\n<li>6. Descendant of David (Mt 1:16; Lk 3:23) and the husband of Mary, the mother of Jesus. Joseph was betrothed to Mary, a young woman of the city of Nazareth. Mary had learned from the angel Gabriel that she was to bear the Son of God, whom she was to name Jesus (Lk 1:31) and that this conception was to be a work of the Holy Spirit (v 35). Joseph was not aware of this, so when he learned that Mary was pregnant, he decided to divorce her quietly, for he was a just man and did not want to humiliate her publicly (Mt 1:19). An angel subsequently appeared to him in a dream to tell him what was happening (Mt 1:21; cf. Is 7:14). The text of Matthew makes it clear that there was no sexual union between Joseph and Mary until after Jesus was born (Mt 1:18, 25; see also Lk 1:34-37).<\/li>\n<p>When Caesar Augustus issued a decree that everyone had to register in his native city for purposes of taxation, Joseph and Mary returned to Bethlehem, where Jesus was subsequently born (Lk 2:1-6). Later, Joseph and Mary took the infant Jesus to the temple to present him to the Lord (vv 22, 33). After the visit of the wise men, an angel appeared to Joseph in a dream and instructed him to take Jesus and Mary to Egypt to protect the child from King Herod (Mt 2:13). Upon the death of Herod, an angel similarly advised him to return to Israel, so the family went to live in Nazareth. The last recorded event that involves Joseph is the incident of Jesus at the temple at age 12 (Lk 2:41-51). Joseph is not mentioned by name, but Mary told Jesus that she and his father had been looking for him anxiously.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was identified by people around Nazareth as “Joseph’s son” (Lk 4:22; Jn 1:45; 6:42). It is only through references identifying Jesus that we learn of Joseph’s trade. Twice Jesus is referred to as “the carpenter’s son” (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3). Joseph was not a carpenter in our sense of the word, for houses were built mostly of stone and earth. He was a woodworker or artificer in wood, and probably most of his work was with furniture and agricultural implements.<\/p>\n<p>During the ministry of Jesus, it was his mother and his brothers who came to look for him (Mt 12:46-50; Mk 3:31-35), so it is assumed that by this time Joseph was dead. Joseph was most likely the father of James, Joseph, Simon, Judas, and unnamed sisters (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Brothers of Jesus; Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<li>7. Joseph and Mary’s son and the brother of Jesus (Mt 13:55); alternately called Joses in Mark 6:3. <em>See<\/em> Brothers of Jesus.<\/li>\n<li>8. Native of Arimathea and the follower of Jesus who provided for his burial. He was a rich man from the town of Arimathea and a respected member of the Sanhedrin, or council (Mk 15:43). He was a good and righteous man and did not go along with the decision to crucify Jesus (Lk 23:50-51). Joseph had been a secret follower of Jesus because he was afraid of the Jews (Jn 19:38), but after the Crucifixion he took courage and went to Pilate to ask for Jesus’ body. He and Nicodemus took the body, treated it with spices, and wrapped it in linen cloths, according to the Jewish burial customs. In a nearby garden was Joseph’s own new rock-cut tomb in which no one had ever been buried. Here they placed Jesus and sealed the tomb with a large stone.<\/li>\n<li> 9. Mattathias’s son and an ancestor of Jesus (Lk 3:25). <em>See<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/li>\n<li>10. KJV rendering of Josech, an ancestor of Jesus, in Luke 3:26. <em>See<\/em> Josech.<\/li>\n<li>11. Jonam’s son and an ancestor of Jesus (Lk 3:30). <em>See<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/li>\n<li>12. Disciple of Jesus who was “called Barsabbas” and “surnamed Justus” (Acts 1:23). Joseph was one of the candidates put forward by the 11 apostles to replace Judas Iscariot. It was Matthias, however, who was chosen.<\/li>\n<li>13. Cypriot Levite who sold a field and gave the proceeds to the apostles. He was surnamed “Barnabas,” meaning “son of encouragement,” by the apostles (Acts 4:36). <em>See<\/em> Barnabas.<\/li>","summary_ro":"JOSEPH 1. Jacob’s 11th son and the firstborn son of Rachel. Rachel named the boy Joseph, meaning “may he add,” expressing her desire that God would give her another son (Gn 30:24). Nothing more is said about Joseph until, at the age of 17, he is seen tending his father’s flocks with his brothers (Gn 37:2). Joseph was the favorite of his father, since he was the son of his old age (v 3) and the firstborn son of his favorite wife. Because of this, his brothers hated Joseph. This envy was magnif...","summary_en":"JOSEPH 1. Jacob’s 11th son and the firstborn son of Rachel. Rachel named the boy Joseph, meaning “may he add,” expressing her desire that God would give her another son (Gn 30:24). Nothing more is said about Joseph until, at the age of 17, he is seen tending his father’s flocks with his brothers (Gn 37:2). Joseph was the favorite of his father, since he was the son of his old age (v 3) and the firstborn son of his favorite wife. Because of this, his brothers hated Joseph. This envy was magnif...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":27018,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Nathanael","title_en":"Nathanael","content_ro":"<h3>NATHANAEL<\/h3>\n<p>Jew from Cana of Galilee whom Jesus called to be a disciple (Jn 1:45-50; 21:2). Initially skeptical when Philip described Jesus as the fulfillment of the whole OT (1:45-46), Nathanael proclaimed Jesus to be the Son of God and the King of Israel (v 49) after an astonishing personal encounter.<\/p>\n<p>The fact that the only NT references to Nathanael occur in the Gospel of John has led some scholars to identify him with several personalities appearing in the synoptic Gospels. Because his call appears with those of Andrew, Peter, and Philip, some have speculated that he was one of the 12, possibly Bartholomew. Three pieces of evidence are cited in support of this position: (1) the name Bartholomew is patronymic (literally “son of Tolmai”) and would be accompanied by another name; (2) each of the Synoptic lists of the 12 apostles place Bartholomew after Philip (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16), paralleling the call of Nathanael after Philip in John’s account; and (3) Bartholomew’s name does not appear in the fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>A second position identifies Nathanael as James, the son of Alphaeus. According to this view, Jesus’ comment in John 1:47 should read “Behold, Israel [not “an Israelite”] indeed, in whom is no guile!” Israel is the name God gave to Jacob, and the NT form of Jacob is James. John addressed James, the son of Alphaeus, as Nathanael in order to distinguish him from others who had become prominent in the early church.<\/p>\n<p>Two less plausible identifications equate Nathanael with either Matthew or Simon the Cananaean. The first is precariously founded on the similar etymologies of the names Matthew (“gift of Yahweh”) and Nathanael (“Yahweh has given”). The second identifies the two on the basis of the common hometown of Cana.<\/p>\n<p>In the final analysis, Nathanael was most likely a disciple who was not a member of the 12 and was known only to John. This suggestion conforms to early patristic evidence. In the fourth Gospel, Nathanael serves as a symbol for the true Jew who overcomes initial skepticism to believe in Christ. This is confirmed by three observations: (1) his initial reaction to Jesus parallels that of others who believed in the Law and the Prophets (Jn 7:15, 27, 41; 9:41); (2) Jesus’ perception of Nathanael under a fig tree (1:48) identifies the latter’s devotion to the Torah (in rabbinic literature the proper place to study the Torah is under a fig tree); and (3) Jesus identifies Nathanael with Jacob, the father of the Israelite nation. In Genesis 25–32, Jacob is certainly sly and cunning in his dealings with Esau and Laban. John 1:51 strengthens the ties between Nathanael and Jacob by presenting the imagery of angels ascending and descending, reminiscent of Jacob’s dream, and by locating the event in Galilee close to Bethel and Jabbok, the sites of Jacob’s experiences. Nathanael is thus a symbol of the pious Israelite for whom Christ came. His response typifies what the fourth Evangelist understands as the appropriate response of the true Israelite to Jesus—from initial skepticism to faith (cf. Rom 9:6).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Apostle, Apostleship.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NATHANAEL<\/h3>\n<p>Jew from Cana of Galilee whom Jesus called to be a disciple (Jn 1:45-50; 21:2). Initially skeptical when Philip described Jesus as the fulfillment of the whole OT (1:45-46), Nathanael proclaimed Jesus to be the Son of God and the King of Israel (v 49) after an astonishing personal encounter.<\/p>\n<p>The fact that the only NT references to Nathanael occur in the Gospel of John has led some scholars to identify him with several personalities appearing in the synoptic Gospels. Because his call appears with those of Andrew, Peter, and Philip, some have speculated that he was one of the 12, possibly Bartholomew. Three pieces of evidence are cited in support of this position: (1) the name Bartholomew is patronymic (literally “son of Tolmai”) and would be accompanied by another name; (2) each of the Synoptic lists of the 12 apostles place Bartholomew after Philip (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16), paralleling the call of Nathanael after Philip in John’s account; and (3) Bartholomew’s name does not appear in the fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>A second position identifies Nathanael as James, the son of Alphaeus. According to this view, Jesus’ comment in John 1:47 should read “Behold, Israel [not “an Israelite”] indeed, in whom is no guile!” Israel is the name God gave to Jacob, and the NT form of Jacob is James. John addressed James, the son of Alphaeus, as Nathanael in order to distinguish him from others who had become prominent in the early church.<\/p>\n<p>Two less plausible identifications equate Nathanael with either Matthew or Simon the Cananaean. The first is precariously founded on the similar etymologies of the names Matthew (“gift of Yahweh”) and Nathanael (“Yahweh has given”). The second identifies the two on the basis of the common hometown of Cana.<\/p>\n<p>In the final analysis, Nathanael was most likely a disciple who was not a member of the 12 and was known only to John. This suggestion conforms to early patristic evidence. In the fourth Gospel, Nathanael serves as a symbol for the true Jew who overcomes initial skepticism to believe in Christ. This is confirmed by three observations: (1) his initial reaction to Jesus parallels that of others who believed in the Law and the Prophets (Jn 7:15, 27, 41; 9:41); (2) Jesus’ perception of Nathanael under a fig tree (1:48) identifies the latter’s devotion to the Torah (in rabbinic literature the proper place to study the Torah is under a fig tree); and (3) Jesus identifies Nathanael with Jacob, the father of the Israelite nation. In Genesis 25–32, Jacob is certainly sly and cunning in his dealings with Esau and Laban. John 1:51 strengthens the ties between Nathanael and Jacob by presenting the imagery of angels ascending and descending, reminiscent of Jacob’s dream, and by locating the event in Galilee close to Bethel and Jabbok, the sites of Jacob’s experiences. Nathanael is thus a symbol of the pious Israelite for whom Christ came. His response typifies what the fourth Evangelist understands as the appropriate response of the true Israelite to Jesus—from initial skepticism to faith (cf. Rom 9:6).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Apostle, Apostleship.<\/p>","summary_ro":"NATHANAEL Jew from Cana of Galilee whom Jesus called to be a disciple (Jn 1:45-50; 21:2). Initially skeptical when Philip described Jesus as the fulfillment of the whole OT (1:45-46), Nathanael proclaimed Jesus to be the Son of God and the King of Israel (v 49) after an astonishing personal encounter. The fact that the only NT references to Nathanael occur in the Gospel of John has led some scholars to identify him with several personalities appearing in the synoptic Gospels. Because his call...","summary_en":"NATHANAEL Jew from Cana of Galilee whom Jesus called to be a disciple (Jn 1:45-50; 21:2). Initially skeptical when Philip described Jesus as the fulfillment of the whole OT (1:45-46), Nathanael proclaimed Jesus to be the Son of God and the King of Israel (v 49) after an astonishing personal encounter. The fact that the only NT references to Nathanael occur in the Gospel of John has led some scholars to identify him with several personalities appearing in the synoptic Gospels. Because his call...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56334,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:45","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:45","content_ro":"<p><strong>1:45<\/strong> <em>Philip<\/em><em>,<\/em> a Greek name, and <em>Nathanael<\/em><em>,<\/em> a Hebrew name, represent the mix of cultures in Galilee. Jesus’ message there addressed both audiences. When Greeks wanted to see Jesus in Jerusalem, they approached Philip (12:20-22). • Jesus grew up in <em>Nazareth<\/em><em>,<\/em> a mountain village southwest of the Sea of Galilee.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>1:45<\/strong> <em>Philip<\/em><em>,<\/em> a Greek name, and <em>Nathanael<\/em><em>,<\/em> a Hebrew name, represent the mix of cultures in Galilee. Jesus’ message there addressed both audiences. When Greeks wanted to see Jesus in Jerusalem, they approached Philip (12:20-22). • Jesus grew up in <em>Nazareth<\/em><em>,<\/em> a mountain village southwest of the Sea of Galilee.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:45 Philip, a Greek name, and Nathanael, a Hebrew name, represent the mix of cultures in Galilee. Jesus’ message there addressed both audiences. When Greeks wanted to see Jesus in Jerusalem, they approached Philip (12:20-22). • Jesus grew up in Nazareth, a mountain village southwest of the Sea of Galilee.","summary_en":"1:45 Philip, a Greek name, and Nathanael, a Hebrew name, represent the mix of cultures in Galilee. Jesus’ message there addressed both audiences. When Greeks wanted to see Jesus in Jerusalem, they approached Philip (12:20-22). • Jesus grew up in Nazareth, a mountain village southwest of the Sea of Galilee.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83960,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:45","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:45","content_ro":"<p><strong>1:45<\/strong> <em>Philip<\/em><em>,<\/em> a Greek name, and <em>Nathanael<\/em><em>,<\/em> a Hebrew name, represent the mix of cultures in Galilee. Jesus’ message there addressed both audiences. When Greeks wanted to see Jesus in Jerusalem, they approached Philip (12:20-22). • Jesus grew up in <em>Nazareth<\/em><em>,<\/em> a mountain village southwest of the Sea of Galilee.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>1:45<\/strong> <em>Philip<\/em><em>,<\/em> a Greek name, and <em>Nathanael<\/em><em>,<\/em> a Hebrew name, represent the mix of cultures in Galilee. Jesus’ message there addressed both audiences. When Greeks wanted to see Jesus in Jerusalem, they approached Philip (12:20-22). • Jesus grew up in <em>Nazareth<\/em><em>,<\/em> a mountain village southwest of the Sea of Galilee.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:45 Philip, a Greek name, and Nathanael, a Hebrew name, represent the mix of cultures in Galilee. Jesus’ message there addressed both audiences. When Greeks wanted to see Jesus in Jerusalem, they approached Philip (12:20-22). • Jesus grew up in Nazareth, a mountain village southwest of the Sea of Galilee.","summary_en":"1:45 Philip, a Greek name, and Nathanael, a Hebrew name, represent the mix of cultures in Galilee. Jesus’ message there addressed both audiences. When Greeks wanted to see Jesus in Jerusalem, they approached Philip (12:20-22). • Jesus grew up in Nazareth, a mountain village southwest of the Sea of Galilee.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111586,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:45","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:45","content_ro":"<p><strong>1:45<\/strong> <em>Philip<\/em><em>,<\/em> a Greek name, and <em>Nathanael<\/em><em>,<\/em> a Hebrew name, represent the mix of cultures in Galilee. Jesus’ message there addressed both audiences. When Greeks wanted to see Jesus in Jerusalem, they approached Philip (12:20-22). • Jesus grew up in <em>Nazareth<\/em><em>,<\/em> a mountain village southwest of the Sea of Galilee.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>1:45<\/strong> <em>Philip<\/em><em>,<\/em> a Greek name, and <em>Nathanael<\/em><em>,<\/em> a Hebrew name, represent the mix of cultures in Galilee. Jesus’ message there addressed both audiences. When Greeks wanted to see Jesus in Jerusalem, they approached Philip (12:20-22). • Jesus grew up in <em>Nazareth<\/em><em>,<\/em> a mountain village southwest of the Sea of Galilee.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:45 Philip, a Greek name, and Nathanael, a Hebrew name, represent the mix of cultures in Galilee. Jesus’ message there addressed both audiences. When Greeks wanted to see Jesus in Jerusalem, they approached Philip (12:20-22). • Jesus grew up in Nazareth, a mountain village southwest of the Sea of Galilee.","summary_en":"1:45 Philip, a Greek name, and Nathanael, a Hebrew name, represent the mix of cultures in Galilee. Jesus’ message there addressed both audiences. When Greeks wanted to see Jesus in Jerusalem, they approached Philip (12:20-22). • Jesus grew up in Nazareth, a mountain village southwest of the Sea of Galilee.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139212,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:45","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:45","content_ro":"<p><strong>1:45<\/strong> <em>Philip<\/em><em>,<\/em> a Greek name, and <em>Nathanael<\/em><em>,<\/em> a Hebrew name, represent the mix of cultures in Galilee. Jesus’ message there addressed both audiences. When Greeks wanted to see Jesus in Jerusalem, they approached Philip (12:20-22). • Jesus grew up in <em>Nazareth<\/em><em>,<\/em> a mountain village southwest of the Sea of Galilee.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>1:45<\/strong> <em>Philip<\/em><em>,<\/em> a Greek name, and <em>Nathanael<\/em><em>,<\/em> a Hebrew name, represent the mix of cultures in Galilee. Jesus’ message there addressed both audiences. When Greeks wanted to see Jesus in Jerusalem, they approached Philip (12:20-22). • Jesus grew up in <em>Nazareth<\/em><em>,<\/em> a mountain village southwest of the Sea of Galilee.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:45 Philip, a Greek name, and Nathanael, a Hebrew name, represent the mix of cultures in Galilee. Jesus’ message there addressed both audiences. When Greeks wanted to see Jesus in Jerusalem, they approached Philip (12:20-22). • Jesus grew up in Nazareth, a mountain village southwest of the Sea of Galilee.","summary_en":"1:45 Philip, a Greek name, and Nathanael, a Hebrew name, represent the mix of cultures in Galilee. Jesus’ message there addressed both audiences. When Greeks wanted to see Jesus in Jerusalem, they approached Philip (12:20-22). • Jesus grew up in Nazareth, a mountain village southwest of the Sea of Galilee.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"46":[{"id":13173,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Galilee","title_en":"Galilee","content_ro":"<h3>GALILEE<\/h3>\n<p>Area in northern Palestine that, in Israel’s earlier history, had boundaries that were not clearly defined but that became more precisely defined in the period of Roman rule. The English name Galilee comes from two Hebrew words meaning “circuit” or “district.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalBackground\">Historical Background<\/p>\n<p>In OT times Galilee was not significant in Israelite life, but in NT times it was a prominent Jewish population center. Galilee is first mentioned in the Bible as the location of Kedesh, a city of refuge in the hill country of Naphtali (Jos 20:7; cf. 21:32; 1 Chr 6:76).<\/p>\n<p>Galilee originally designated the area occupied by the tribes of Naphtali, Zebulun (Is 9:1), and possibly Asher (if Cabul in Jos 19:27 is the same city as in 1 Kgs 9:11-13). None of those tribes was able to completely expel the original Canaanite inhabitants (Jgs 1:30-33; 2:1-4), and as a result, Galilee tended to be racially mixed. The cities that King Solomon gave to Hiram, gentile king of Tyre, were within Galilee (1 Kgs 9:11), and the gentile intermixture in that area may have influenced Solomon’s choice of those cities for a gift. This racially mixed condition is also the probable basis for the designation in Isaiah 9:1, “Galilee of the nations” (cf. Mt 4:15; 1 Macc 5:15).<\/p>\n<p>During the monarchy, Galilee was a buffer zone between Israel and Syria, and it bore the brunt of Syrian invasions against Israel. This fact is cited by the prophet Isaiah (Is 9:1), but he saw it as the prelude to a brighter day when the messianic king would reign. Galilee was conquered by Syrian King Ben-hadad (1 Kgs 15:20) and was probably recovered by Israel’s King Ahab. Galilee was later subjugated by the Arameans under Hazael (2 Kgs 10:32; 12:18; 13:22) and regained by Jeroboam II (2 Kgs 14:23-25). As a result of Assyrian conquests in the area of Damascus and Galilee in 732 <span>BC<\/span> by Tiglath-pileser III (2 Kgs 15:29), more Gentiles were imported into the area while many of the Jewish inhabitants were deported. This naturally led to greater gentile influence and domination in Galilee. Under the successive influence of Babylonia, Persia, Greece, and Syria, Galilee was constantly experiencing infiltration and migration. From the time of the Assyrian conquest of Israel to about the end of the second century <span>BC<\/span>, Galilee’s population was dominated by Gentiles, with only a few Jews.<\/p>\n<p>The Jews remaining in Galilee were brought to Judea by Simon Maccabeus in 164 <span>BC<\/span> (1 Macc 5:21-23). Galilee was conquered by Aristobulus I (104–103 <span>BC<\/span>), who forced the inhabitants to be circumcised and to submit to Jewish laws, a work that probably already had been initiated by John Hyrcanus (134–104 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n\n<p>Herod the Great (ruler under Rome, 37–4 <span>BC<\/span>) affixed Galilee to his kingdom, and more Jews were attracted there. Josephus recorded that Galilee had 240 cities and villages and 100,000 men available to fight against the Romans. After the death of Herod the Great, Galilee was included in the tetrarchy of Herod Antipas (4 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 39). With the banishment of Herod Antipas in <span>AD<\/span> 39, Galilee was added to the territory of Herod Agrippa I, who ruled it until he died in <span>AD<\/span> 44. Rome directly administered Galilee until it was put under the rule of Herod Agrippa II. By siding with the Romans during the Jewish revolts, he was able to retain his position until <span>AD<\/span> 100. In spite of the Galileans’ attempt to gain independence, the revolutionary faction was brought under subjection by Vespasian in <span>AD<\/span> 67. After Herod Agrippa II’s death, Galilee became part of the Roman province of Syria.<\/p>\n<p>Following the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Sanhedrin and many other Jews of southern Palestine flocked to Galilee. As a result, such cities as Tiberias and Sepphoris became Jewish, and the dispersed Jews came to think of Galilee as their center. Tiberias became a center for Jewish learning, and it was there that such major contributions as the Tiberian system of vowel pointing the Hebrew consonantal text were made, as well as the formulation of the Mishnah and the Palestinian Talmud.<\/p>\n<p>From about <span>AD<\/span> 451 until the Muslim rule over Galilee began in the seventh century, Galilee was governed by the Christian patriarchate of Jerusalem, set up by the Council of Chalcedon in <span>AD<\/span> 451. Muslim rule from the seventh century on was continuous except for the intervals caused by the twelfth-century Crusades and World War I. All of Galilee has been included in the modern state of Israel since its establishment in 1948.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Boundaries\">Boundaries<\/p>\n<p>Galilee was bounded on the east by the upper Jordan River and the Sea of Galilee and on the south by the plain of Esdraelon, which served as a natural boundary between Galilee and Samaria. At times the plain was included in Galilee, as it was during the intertestamental period (1 Macc 10:30; 12:47-49). While the northern boundary was uncertain and variable during Galilee’s history, in NT times it reached to Lake Huleh. The western boundary followed the Mediterranean Sea to Mt Carmel.<\/p>\n<p>From the time of the divided kingdom until the Assyrian conquest of Galilee (734 <span>BC<\/span>), it was the northernmost part of the kingdom of Israel. The area was divided into upper Galilee and lower Galilee by the plain of Ramah, which ran between Capernaum and Ptolemais (cf. Jdt 1:8; 1 Macc 12:49; Josephus’s <em>War<\/em> 3.3.1). In the Mishnah (compilation of early rabbinical interpretation of the Law), Galilee is divided into three parts corresponding to the natural divisions of plain, hill country, and mountain. Under Roman rule, Galilee was about 25 to 30 miles (40 to 50 kilometers) from east to west and about 35 to 40 miles (55 to 65 kilometers) from north to south.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Geography\">Geography<\/p>\n<p>The attractive Galilean landscape is made up of volcanic limestone hills and fertile alluvial plains. Its climate is cooler than that of any other part of Palestine, and its beauty and fertility contrast sharply with the barren, sun-baked hills of southern Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>The physical features range from the high mountains in the north to the plain of Esdraelon in the south. Mt Tabor is prominent on the east, while Mt Carmel stands out on the west. Much of upper Galilee is 3,000 feet (914.4 meters) above sea level, and in NT times it was largely forested and less densely inhabited than lower Galilee. Lower Galilee starts at 1,500 to 2,000 feet (450 to 600 meters) above sea level and descends sharply to the Sea of Galilee, more than 600 feet (182.9 meters) below sea level.<\/p>\n<p>Besides the average annual rainfall of 25 inches (63.5 centimeters), Galilee is watered by the streams that flow from springs in the hills and are the main sources of the beautiful Kishon River at Janin, and the headwaters of the Jordan River, the largest river in Palestine. The ground is also moistened by heavy dews resulting from climatic conditions created by the Lebanon mountain range to the north.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Cities\">Cities<\/p>\n<p>Among the more notable cities in Galilee’s early history were Kedesh in Naphtali, a city of refuge (Jos 20:7; 21:32; 1 Chr 6:76), and Hazor, about 10 miles (16.1 kilometers) north of the Sea of Galilee (Jos 11:10; 1 Kgs 9:15). During the time of Christ, Chorazin (Mt 11:21) and Capernaum (4:13; 11:23) were prominent cities located in the northeast near the Sea of Galilee. Capernaum seems to have been a center for Jesus’ ministry in the area (Mt 4:13; Mk 2:1; 9:33; etc.). Nazareth is especially significant as the city of Christ’s childhood (Mt 2:22-23; Lk 2:39; 4:16; etc.). Nain (Lk 7:11-17), located on the northern edge of the mountain now called Little Hermon, and Cana of Galilee (Jn 2:1-11) also figured prominently in Christ’s ministry. Sepphoris and Tiberias were important cities during Roman administration.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RoadsandTravel\">Roads and Travel<\/p>\n<p>Many roads traversed Galilee, and those in NT times were superior due to Roman construction and maintenance.<\/p>\n<p>Among the best-known trade routes was the Via Maris (the Way of the Sea), which ran through Galilee on its way from Damascus to Egypt. Another main road ran from Tiberias, near the Sea of Galilee, to Acco (Ptolemais), a port on the Phoenician coast. Major caravan routes also connected Galilee with the markets of the East. The area was tied together by a network of spurs and connecting roads that branched from the main highways.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Inhabitants\">Inhabitants<\/p>\n<p>The occupants of Galilee (Galileans) were basically Jewish in religious and patriotic orientation, but they were composed of various ethnic elements. The influence of this mixture was sufficient to cause recognizable differences in speech from that of southern Palestine (cf. Mt 26:69, 73). The Galileans absorbed more Greek and Roman influences than did the Judean Jews. The racial mixture, differences in speech, and location caused Judean Jews to view Galilee and its inhabitants with contempt (Jn 1:46; 7:41, 52).<\/p>\n<p>Lower Galilee was densely settled with villages, and in NT times the population was probably about three million. The fertility of the soil and resultant fruitfulness of the country produced a prosperous Jewish populace, particularly in the centuries immediately after the time of Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Government\">Government<\/p>\n<p>Galilee was under the Roman rule of emperors Augustus and Tiberius during the time of Christ. Roman fortifications throughout Galilee were a constant reminder of the presence and influence of the Roman Empire. During Christ’s ministry, Rome installed the tetrarch Herod Antipas (Mt 14:1; Lk 23:5-7) to rule the territory. He was appointed to office when 17 years old. Sepphoris was his first capital; in about <span>AD<\/span> 22 he built Tiberias on the shore of the Sea of Galilee as his new capital, in honor of the emperor.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Products\">Products<\/p>\n<p>Abundant crops enabled Galilee to provide produce for the neighboring Phoenician cities of Tyre and Sidon around the middle of the first century <span>AD<\/span>. Main crops included grapes, pomegranates, olives, and grains. Fishing in the Sea of Galilee was a prominent business in NT times (Mk 1:14-20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusandGalilee\">Jesus and Galilee<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was raised in Galilee (Lk 4:16), and 11 of his 12 disciples were from there (Judas Iscariot was the only Judean).<\/p>\n<p>The culture, commerce, farming, and fishing business of the area formed the background for much of Jesus’ ministry, as his parables show (Mt 20:1-8; 21:33; Mk 4:3; Lk 13:6-9). The first three Gospels are largely occupied with Christ’s ministry in Galilee, with much of it being spent around the Sea of Galilee. Most of his parables (19 of 32) were spoken here, and the vast majority of his miracles (25 of 33) were performed in Galilee. Jesus received his greatest response in this region. The Sermon on the Mount was spoken in Galilee, and one of its mountains was the scene of the Lord’s transfiguration. Many of the women who followed Christ and ministered to him also came from there (Mt 27:55). Two of Christ’s most significant postresurrection appearances took place in Galilee (Mt 28:16-20; Jn 21:1-23), and one of Christ’s own titles, Jesus of Nazareth (Jn 1:45), identified him as a Galilean.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Galileans\">Galileans<\/p>\n<p>Since Jesus and most of the 12 disciples were from Galilee, it was natural for the term to be applied to all of his followers, especially since it implied that the movement was not as pure as Judean Judaism. Some interpreters believe that Luke 22:59 is an example of the use of “Galilean” as a title; in Acts 1:11 and 2:7 it is merely a geographical reference. One sure reference to Christians by that title appears in the work of the pagan philosopher Epictetus (<span>AD<\/span> 50?–135?), who was impressed with how Christians died for their faith. It is not clear how common the title of Galilean was, but it had obviously spread from Judea to Rome, where Epictetus lived.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Palestine; Sea of Galilee.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GALILEE<\/h3>\n<p>Area in northern Palestine that, in Israel’s earlier history, had boundaries that were not clearly defined but that became more precisely defined in the period of Roman rule. The English name Galilee comes from two Hebrew words meaning “circuit” or “district.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalBackground\">Historical Background<\/p>\n<p>In OT times Galilee was not significant in Israelite life, but in NT times it was a prominent Jewish population center. Galilee is first mentioned in the Bible as the location of Kedesh, a city of refuge in the hill country of Naphtali (Jos 20:7; cf. 21:32; 1 Chr 6:76).<\/p>\n<p>Galilee originally designated the area occupied by the tribes of Naphtali, Zebulun (Is 9:1), and possibly Asher (if Cabul in Jos 19:27 is the same city as in 1 Kgs 9:11-13). None of those tribes was able to completely expel the original Canaanite inhabitants (Jgs 1:30-33; 2:1-4), and as a result, Galilee tended to be racially mixed. The cities that King Solomon gave to Hiram, gentile king of Tyre, were within Galilee (1 Kgs 9:11), and the gentile intermixture in that area may have influenced Solomon’s choice of those cities for a gift. This racially mixed condition is also the probable basis for the designation in Isaiah 9:1, “Galilee of the nations” (cf. Mt 4:15; 1 Macc 5:15).<\/p>\n<p>During the monarchy, Galilee was a buffer zone between Israel and Syria, and it bore the brunt of Syrian invasions against Israel. This fact is cited by the prophet Isaiah (Is 9:1), but he saw it as the prelude to a brighter day when the messianic king would reign. Galilee was conquered by Syrian King Ben-hadad (1 Kgs 15:20) and was probably recovered by Israel’s King Ahab. Galilee was later subjugated by the Arameans under Hazael (2 Kgs 10:32; 12:18; 13:22) and regained by Jeroboam II (2 Kgs 14:23-25). As a result of Assyrian conquests in the area of Damascus and Galilee in 732 <span>BC<\/span> by Tiglath-pileser III (2 Kgs 15:29), more Gentiles were imported into the area while many of the Jewish inhabitants were deported. This naturally led to greater gentile influence and domination in Galilee. Under the successive influence of Babylonia, Persia, Greece, and Syria, Galilee was constantly experiencing infiltration and migration. From the time of the Assyrian conquest of Israel to about the end of the second century <span>BC<\/span>, Galilee’s population was dominated by Gentiles, with only a few Jews.<\/p>\n<p>The Jews remaining in Galilee were brought to Judea by Simon Maccabeus in 164 <span>BC<\/span> (1 Macc 5:21-23). Galilee was conquered by Aristobulus I (104–103 <span>BC<\/span>), who forced the inhabitants to be circumcised and to submit to Jewish laws, a work that probably already had been initiated by John Hyrcanus (134–104 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n\n<p>Herod the Great (ruler under Rome, 37–4 <span>BC<\/span>) affixed Galilee to his kingdom, and more Jews were attracted there. Josephus recorded that Galilee had 240 cities and villages and 100,000 men available to fight against the Romans. After the death of Herod the Great, Galilee was included in the tetrarchy of Herod Antipas (4 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 39). With the banishment of Herod Antipas in <span>AD<\/span> 39, Galilee was added to the territory of Herod Agrippa I, who ruled it until he died in <span>AD<\/span> 44. Rome directly administered Galilee until it was put under the rule of Herod Agrippa II. By siding with the Romans during the Jewish revolts, he was able to retain his position until <span>AD<\/span> 100. In spite of the Galileans’ attempt to gain independence, the revolutionary faction was brought under subjection by Vespasian in <span>AD<\/span> 67. After Herod Agrippa II’s death, Galilee became part of the Roman province of Syria.<\/p>\n<p>Following the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Sanhedrin and many other Jews of southern Palestine flocked to Galilee. As a result, such cities as Tiberias and Sepphoris became Jewish, and the dispersed Jews came to think of Galilee as their center. Tiberias became a center for Jewish learning, and it was there that such major contributions as the Tiberian system of vowel pointing the Hebrew consonantal text were made, as well as the formulation of the Mishnah and the Palestinian Talmud.<\/p>\n<p>From about <span>AD<\/span> 451 until the Muslim rule over Galilee began in the seventh century, Galilee was governed by the Christian patriarchate of Jerusalem, set up by the Council of Chalcedon in <span>AD<\/span> 451. Muslim rule from the seventh century on was continuous except for the intervals caused by the twelfth-century Crusades and World War I. All of Galilee has been included in the modern state of Israel since its establishment in 1948.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Boundaries\">Boundaries<\/p>\n<p>Galilee was bounded on the east by the upper Jordan River and the Sea of Galilee and on the south by the plain of Esdraelon, which served as a natural boundary between Galilee and Samaria. At times the plain was included in Galilee, as it was during the intertestamental period (1 Macc 10:30; 12:47-49). While the northern boundary was uncertain and variable during Galilee’s history, in NT times it reached to Lake Huleh. The western boundary followed the Mediterranean Sea to Mt Carmel.<\/p>\n<p>From the time of the divided kingdom until the Assyrian conquest of Galilee (734 <span>BC<\/span>), it was the northernmost part of the kingdom of Israel. The area was divided into upper Galilee and lower Galilee by the plain of Ramah, which ran between Capernaum and Ptolemais (cf. Jdt 1:8; 1 Macc 12:49; Josephus’s <em>War<\/em> 3.3.1). In the Mishnah (compilation of early rabbinical interpretation of the Law), Galilee is divided into three parts corresponding to the natural divisions of plain, hill country, and mountain. Under Roman rule, Galilee was about 25 to 30 miles (40 to 50 kilometers) from east to west and about 35 to 40 miles (55 to 65 kilometers) from north to south.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Geography\">Geography<\/p>\n<p>The attractive Galilean landscape is made up of volcanic limestone hills and fertile alluvial plains. Its climate is cooler than that of any other part of Palestine, and its beauty and fertility contrast sharply with the barren, sun-baked hills of southern Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>The physical features range from the high mountains in the north to the plain of Esdraelon in the south. Mt Tabor is prominent on the east, while Mt Carmel stands out on the west. Much of upper Galilee is 3,000 feet (914.4 meters) above sea level, and in NT times it was largely forested and less densely inhabited than lower Galilee. Lower Galilee starts at 1,500 to 2,000 feet (450 to 600 meters) above sea level and descends sharply to the Sea of Galilee, more than 600 feet (182.9 meters) below sea level.<\/p>\n<p>Besides the average annual rainfall of 25 inches (63.5 centimeters), Galilee is watered by the streams that flow from springs in the hills and are the main sources of the beautiful Kishon River at Janin, and the headwaters of the Jordan River, the largest river in Palestine. The ground is also moistened by heavy dews resulting from climatic conditions created by the Lebanon mountain range to the north.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Cities\">Cities<\/p>\n<p>Among the more notable cities in Galilee’s early history were Kedesh in Naphtali, a city of refuge (Jos 20:7; 21:32; 1 Chr 6:76), and Hazor, about 10 miles (16.1 kilometers) north of the Sea of Galilee (Jos 11:10; 1 Kgs 9:15). During the time of Christ, Chorazin (Mt 11:21) and Capernaum (4:13; 11:23) were prominent cities located in the northeast near the Sea of Galilee. Capernaum seems to have been a center for Jesus’ ministry in the area (Mt 4:13; Mk 2:1; 9:33; etc.). Nazareth is especially significant as the city of Christ’s childhood (Mt 2:22-23; Lk 2:39; 4:16; etc.). Nain (Lk 7:11-17), located on the northern edge of the mountain now called Little Hermon, and Cana of Galilee (Jn 2:1-11) also figured prominently in Christ’s ministry. Sepphoris and Tiberias were important cities during Roman administration.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RoadsandTravel\">Roads and Travel<\/p>\n<p>Many roads traversed Galilee, and those in NT times were superior due to Roman construction and maintenance.<\/p>\n<p>Among the best-known trade routes was the Via Maris (the Way of the Sea), which ran through Galilee on its way from Damascus to Egypt. Another main road ran from Tiberias, near the Sea of Galilee, to Acco (Ptolemais), a port on the Phoenician coast. Major caravan routes also connected Galilee with the markets of the East. The area was tied together by a network of spurs and connecting roads that branched from the main highways.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Inhabitants\">Inhabitants<\/p>\n<p>The occupants of Galilee (Galileans) were basically Jewish in religious and patriotic orientation, but they were composed of various ethnic elements. The influence of this mixture was sufficient to cause recognizable differences in speech from that of southern Palestine (cf. Mt 26:69, 73). The Galileans absorbed more Greek and Roman influences than did the Judean Jews. The racial mixture, differences in speech, and location caused Judean Jews to view Galilee and its inhabitants with contempt (Jn 1:46; 7:41, 52).<\/p>\n<p>Lower Galilee was densely settled with villages, and in NT times the population was probably about three million. The fertility of the soil and resultant fruitfulness of the country produced a prosperous Jewish populace, particularly in the centuries immediately after the time of Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Government\">Government<\/p>\n<p>Galilee was under the Roman rule of emperors Augustus and Tiberius during the time of Christ. Roman fortifications throughout Galilee were a constant reminder of the presence and influence of the Roman Empire. During Christ’s ministry, Rome installed the tetrarch Herod Antipas (Mt 14:1; Lk 23:5-7) to rule the territory. He was appointed to office when 17 years old. Sepphoris was his first capital; in about <span>AD<\/span> 22 he built Tiberias on the shore of the Sea of Galilee as his new capital, in honor of the emperor.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Products\">Products<\/p>\n<p>Abundant crops enabled Galilee to provide produce for the neighboring Phoenician cities of Tyre and Sidon around the middle of the first century <span>AD<\/span>. Main crops included grapes, pomegranates, olives, and grains. Fishing in the Sea of Galilee was a prominent business in NT times (Mk 1:14-20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusandGalilee\">Jesus and Galilee<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was raised in Galilee (Lk 4:16), and 11 of his 12 disciples were from there (Judas Iscariot was the only Judean).<\/p>\n<p>The culture, commerce, farming, and fishing business of the area formed the background for much of Jesus’ ministry, as his parables show (Mt 20:1-8; 21:33; Mk 4:3; Lk 13:6-9). The first three Gospels are largely occupied with Christ’s ministry in Galilee, with much of it being spent around the Sea of Galilee. Most of his parables (19 of 32) were spoken here, and the vast majority of his miracles (25 of 33) were performed in Galilee. Jesus received his greatest response in this region. The Sermon on the Mount was spoken in Galilee, and one of its mountains was the scene of the Lord’s transfiguration. Many of the women who followed Christ and ministered to him also came from there (Mt 27:55). Two of Christ’s most significant postresurrection appearances took place in Galilee (Mt 28:16-20; Jn 21:1-23), and one of Christ’s own titles, Jesus of Nazareth (Jn 1:45), identified him as a Galilean.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Galileans\">Galileans<\/p>\n<p>Since Jesus and most of the 12 disciples were from Galilee, it was natural for the term to be applied to all of his followers, especially since it implied that the movement was not as pure as Judean Judaism. Some interpreters believe that Luke 22:59 is an example of the use of “Galilean” as a title; in Acts 1:11 and 2:7 it is merely a geographical reference. One sure reference to Christians by that title appears in the work of the pagan philosopher Epictetus (<span>AD<\/span> 50?–135?), who was impressed with how Christians died for their faith. It is not clear how common the title of Galilean was, but it had obviously spread from Judea to Rome, where Epictetus lived.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Palestine; Sea of Galilee.<\/p>","summary_ro":"GALILEE Area in northern Palestine that, in Israel’s earlier history, had boundaries that were not clearly defined but that became more precisely defined in the period of Roman rule. The English name Galilee comes from two Hebrew words meaning “circuit” or “district.” Historical Background In OT times Galilee was not significant in Israelite life, but in NT times it was a prominent Jewish population center. Galilee is first mentioned in the Bible as the location of Kedesh, a city of refuge in...","summary_en":"GALILEE Area in northern Palestine that, in Israel’s earlier history, had boundaries that were not clearly defined but that became more precisely defined in the period of Roman rule. The English name Galilee comes from two Hebrew words meaning “circuit” or “district.” Historical Background In OT times Galilee was not significant in Israelite life, but in NT times it was a prominent Jewish population center. Galilee is first mentioned in the Bible as the location of Kedesh, a city of refuge in...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":21076,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Judaism","title_en":"Judaism","content_ro":"<h3>JUDAISM<\/h3>\n<p>Religion and culture of the Jewish people from the beginning of the postexilic period (538 <span>BC<\/span>) to modern times. The term “Judaism” is derived from “Judah,” the name of the southern kingdom of ancient Israel, while “Jew” is a shortened form of “Judeans.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheSecondTemple\">The Period of the Second Temple (515 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 70)<\/p>\n<h5>Historical Survey<\/h5>\n<p>The united kingdom of Israel under Saul, David, and Solomon came to an end shortly after the death of Solomon. Rehoboam, his son, provoked a revolt about 930 <span>BC<\/span> on the part of the 10 northern tribes by levying unreasonably high taxes (1 Kgs 12). From that time on, the kingdoms of Israel (or Samaria, the northern kingdom) and Judah (the southern kingdom) maintained a separate existence. The northern kingdom fell to the Assyrians in 722 <span>BC<\/span>, and thousands of captives, primarily members of the upper class, were exiled forcibly and taken to Assyria, where they presumably intermarried with the native population and disappeared from history. The kingdom of Judah survived as an independent state until 597 <span>BC<\/span>, when it came under the control of the Babylonians under Nebuchadnezzar. The temple was finally destroyed in 586 <span>BC<\/span> and many captives were carried off to Babylonia, beginning a period of exile that was to last two generations. The Babylonians were defeated by Cyrus the Persian in 539 <span>BC<\/span>, and the following year the king issued a decree permitting all captive peoples to return to the lands of their origin (2 Chr 36:22-23; Ezr 1). At least four waves of Jewish expatriates returned from Mesopotamia to Judea during the century following the decree of Cyrus, under such leaders as Sheshbazzar, Zerubbabel, Ezra, and Nehemiah. Many Jews, however, chose to remain in their adopted Mesopotamian homeland. The dedication of the second temple in the spring of 515 <span>BC<\/span> provided a formal end to the exilic period of 70 years (Jer 29:10), and was a direct result of the prophetic exhortations of Haggai and Zechariah.<\/p>\n<p>In Judea the Jewish people were ruled by governors who held office at the pleasure of the Persian king. One of the earlier governors was Zerubabbel (Hg 1:1; 2:1-2), a descendant of David (1 Chr 3:10-19). In some way he shared rule with the high priest Jeshua ben Jehozadak. Palestine was part of one of the 20 satrapies of the Persian Empire, which lasted from 539 to 331 <span>BC<\/span>, when it fell to the Greeks under Alexander the Great. Little is known about the historical developments in Palestine during most of the Persian period. When Alexander died in 323 <span>BC<\/span>, his empire was divided up among his generals; Egypt and Palestine fell to Ptolemy I. The Ptolemies were benevolent despots who allowed the Jews of Palestine a measure of freedom and autonomy. After the battle of Paneion in 198 <span>BC<\/span>, Palestine came under the rule of the Seleucid Empire, founded by Seleucus I, another of Alexander’s generals.<\/p>\n<p>The Seleucid Empire embraced a very large area with a diverse population, extending from Asia Minor and Palestine in the west to the borders of India on the east. Antiochus IV (Epiphanes) ascended the Seleucid throne in 175 <span>BC<\/span> and attempted to unify his vast empire by Hellenizing it (i.e., by forcing the adoption of Greek language and culture). Local cultures and religions were forcibly suppressed as a result of this policy, and the Jewish state in Palestine was perhaps the hardest hit of all. In 167 <span>BC<\/span> Antiochus IV dedicated the temple in Jerusalem to Olympian Zeus, sacrificed a sow on the altar, destroyed scrolls containing the Jewish Scriptures, and forbade the rite of circumcision. This repression triggered a revolt led by an aged priest named Mattathias and his sons. The Seleucids were repulsed, and finally in 164 <span>BC<\/span> the temple was retaken by Mattathias’s son Judas the Maccabee (an epithet meaning “the hammer”). This Jewish victory has been commemorated annually by the festival of Hanukkah (“dedication”). Judas and his brothers, called Maccabees or Hasmoneans (Mattathias was of the house of Hasmon), and their descendants ruled Judea from 164 to 63 <span>BC<\/span>, when Palestine fell to the Roman general Pompey. Thereafter, Palestine remained a vassal of Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Hyrcanus, a Hasmonean, was high priest after the conquest of Judea by the Romans, though Antipater (an Idumean) was the real power behind Hyrcanus. The sons of Antipater, Phasael and Herod, were governors of Jerusalem and Galilee, respectively. Upon the assassination of Antipater in 43 <span>BC<\/span>, and through his connections in Rome, Herod (later called Herod the Great) was named king of Judea by the Roman senate; he reigned from 37 to 4 <span>BC<\/span>. When he died, Palestine was divided up by the emperor Augustus (27 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 14) and placed under the governorship of three of Herod’s sons: Herod Archelaus (ethnarch of Judea, Idumea, and Samaria from 4 <span>BC<\/span> to <span>AD<\/span> 6), Herod Antipas (tetrarch of Galilee and Perea from 4 <span>BC<\/span> to <span>AD<\/span> 39), and Herod Philip (tetrarch of Batanea, Trachonitis, and other small states from 4 <span>BC<\/span> to <span>AD<\/span> 34). These territories were generally placed under Roman procurators after the sons of Herod had died or been deposed. For a brief period (<span>AD<\/span> 41–44), Herod Agrippa I, the grandson of Herod the Great, ruled virtually the same territory as his grandfather. Upon his death (narrated in Acts 12:20-23), his territories were placed under Roman procurators. The greed and ineptitude of these procurators provoked the Jewish populace to rebel. The ill-fated Jewish revolt of <span>AD<\/span> 66–73 resulted in the destruction of the second temple by the tenth Roman legion under Titus in <span>AD<\/span> 70. The revolt was completely quelled in <span>AD<\/span> 73, when more than 900 Jews under siege in the desert fortress of Masada near the Dead Sea committed mass suicide rather than fall into Roman hands. These tragic events ended permanently the temple cult and the priestly system in Judaism.<\/p>\n<h5>Social and Religious Developments<\/h5>\n<p>The Babylonian conquest of Judea and the destruction of the Solomonic temple in 586 <span>BC<\/span> produced dramatic social and religious changes in Jewish life. The cessation of the temple cult struck a serious blow at the heart of the Israelite religion, since the Jerusalem temple alone was the legitimate and divinely appointed place for discharging much of the ritual requirement of the Mosaic law, chiefly the sacrificial cult. Even the three annual pilgrimage festivals, Succoth (Tabernacles), Pesach (Passover), and Shavuoth (Weeks) could no longer be observed by pious Jews who had remained in Judea after 586 <span>BC<\/span>. When after 538 <span>BC<\/span> many exiles chose to return to Judea, many others elected to remain in their new homeland. For the latter, the temple cult, even when reinstituted in 516 <span>BC<\/span>, could no longer play a significant role in their religious lives.<\/p>\n<p>During the exilic and early postexilic period, the peculiar Jewish institution of the synagogue (a Greek word meaning “gathering place”) began to evolve. The synagogue became such a popular and useful institution for Jewish communities outside Palestine that in the centuries after the dedication of the second temple they sprang up throughout Palestine, many in Jerusalem itself. By the end of the second temple period, the synagogue had come to play three important functions in Jewish life: it served as a house of prayer, a house of study, and a place of assembly. First-century <span>AD<\/span> synagogue worship is illustrated in Luke 4:16-30 and Acts 13:13-42. The focus of the service was a reading of a selection from the Torah (Law of Moses), then one from the Haphtorah (Prophets). These readings were followed by a homily based on Scripture. Other elements in first-century <span>AD<\/span> synagogue worship included the recitation of the Shema (“Hear, O Israel”), a combination of biblical passages including Deuteronomy 6:4-9; 11:13-21 and Numbers 15:37-41, and the Shemoneh Esreh (Eighteen Benedictions) called the Amidah (“standing”) because it was recited while standing upright. Jews also wore fringes on their garments in obedience to Numbers 15:38-39 (Mt 23:5), and phylacteries on their foreheads and left arms. Phylacteries are little boxes containing the portions of Scripture recited in Shema; they were used in literal fulfillment of the command in Deuteronomy 6:8. Archaeologists have discovered first-century phylacteries in the ruins of Masada.<\/p>\n<p>Outside of Palestine, Mesopotamia became the second most important center of Judaism. The Babylonian Jewish community was known as the Golah (“captivity”), and its titular head was called the Resh Galuta or Exilarch (both terms mean “leader of the captivity”). By the end of the exilic period, the descendants of the ancient original captives had forgotten Hebrew and had adopted Aramaic, the international language of the ancient Near East and sister language to Hebrew, as their first language. Even in Palestine, Aramaic was the primary language spoken. Thus, when portions of Scripture were read in synagogue services in Hebrew, most of those present were unable to understand what was read. This problem was solved by providing a methurgeman (translator) who would translate orally short sections of Scripture. Eventually these targums (“translations”) were reduced to writing, beginning in the second century <span>AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>By the first century <span>AD<\/span>, it had been estimated that there were from four to seven million Jews in the Greco-Roman world, perhaps three to four times the population of Palestine. Jews in lands outside of Palestine came to be known collectively as the Diaspora (“scattering”). After the Greeks dominated the Mediterranean world through Alexander and his successors, Greek became the common language throughout this region. Just as Mesopotamian Jews spoke Aramaic in place of Hebrew, so Jews in the Greco-Roman world came to speak Greek. By the middle of the third century <span>BC<\/span>, Hellenistic Jews began to translate the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek. This translation, called the Septuagint (a term meaning “seventy,” based on a legend that it was translated simultaneously by seventy Jewish scholars), contained a more extensive canon of Scripture than that recognized by Palestinian Judaism. This reflects the more liberal attitudes of Hellenistic Jews.<\/p>\n<p>During the second century <span>BC<\/span>, most of the major sects within Palestinian Judaism came into being. The Hasidim (“pious”) were members of a religious association that aided the Hasmoneans in the revolt against the Seleucids (1 Macc 2:42; 7:13) but later opposed them when they claimed rights to the priesthood. Both the Pharisees and Essenes may have their origin in this religious sect. The Sadducees were perhaps connected with Zadok, a high priest appointed by David. Zadok’s descendants were regarded as the only legitimate priestly line; they were devoted above the Levites in Ezekiel 40–48. The Sadducees were a wealthy, aristocratic class that monopolized the high priesthood. They did not believe in angels, spirits, life after death, or the resurrection (Acts 23:8), nor did they accept the validity of the oral law as developed by the Pharisees. They left no writings and disappeared with the destruction of the temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees (“separated ones”) first appear in our sources toward the end of the second century <span>BC<\/span> and were involved primarily in political affairs. They represented the common people against the tyrannical Hasmonean ruler Alexander Janneus (103–76 <span>BC<\/span>), who had hundreds of Pharisees executed in reprisal. By the first century <span>AD<\/span>, the Pharisees seem wholly concerned with religious matters and were noted for the scrupulous observance of the Mosaic law as traditionally interpreted. On grounds of ritual purity, they separated themselves from other Jews who were not as scrupulous and who might contaminate them. Pharisees went about in groups called Haberim (“associates”) in which they were insulated from those who were lax religiously. In their zeal to remain faithful to the Mosaic law, the Pharisees developed an oral law (later erroneously attributed to Moses) that served as a fence around the Torah. This oral law was an interpretation and expansion of the 613 commands in the Mosaic law; it was finally compiled and reduced to written form as the Mishnah (“teaching”) in the late second century <span>AD<\/span>. Paul (Acts 22:3; 23:6; 26:5; Phil 3:5) and many other early Christians were converts from Pharisaism (Acts 15:5). Pharisaic Judaism survived the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 to form the rabbinic Judaism that dominated Jewish religious life from the second century <span>AD<\/span> to modern times.<\/p>\n<p>The Essenes were another religious sect within Judaism that had its origins in the second century <span>BC<\/span>. Like the Pharisees, the Essenes were concerned principally with maintaining ritual purity in obedience to the law of Moses. The Essenes lived and worked in Jewish society; they tried to influence people by the simple, altruistic life they followed. Some Essenes also lived in their own communities, to which they returned each night after work. There were numerous religious factions within Judaism, and one such group, which may only have had vague connections with the Essenes, established a community on the western shore of the Dead Sea. This group regarded itself as the true Israel and in the wilderness prepared for the final visitation of God by keeping themselves pure from all defilement. Many documents written by members of this sect were discovered in caves near the Dead Sea where they had been hidden just before the Romans destroyed the settlement. These documents, the Dead Sea Scrolls, have provided detailed information about this religious sect and its beliefs.<\/p>\n<p>The Zealots were another Jewish sect, who may be related to the Sicarii (“dagger men”). This group of political activists flourished from <span>AD<\/span> 6 to 66. Regarding God alone as their sovereign, they attempted to overthrow the Romans and those who collaborated with them by violent means, including assassination. They helped to foment the Jewish revolt of <span>AD<\/span> 66–73 and perished with Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\n<p>Social class and status in first-century <span>AD<\/span> Palestine were determined in accordance with the rules of ritual purity. The upper class comprised members of the religious establishment, such as the Sadducees, scribes, Pharisees, and Jerusalem priests. The Sanhedrin was a deliberative body whose membership was drawn from these groups. For all practical purposes there was no middle class. The lower class consisted primarily of the Am Ha Arez (“people of the land”)—Jews who were ignorant of the law through lack of education and who did not scrupulously observe those commandments with which they were familiar. The generally hostile attitude of the Pharisees toward the Am Ha Arez is expressed in John 7:49: “But this crowd, who do not know the law, are accursed” (<span>rsv<\/span>). There was yet another social class in first-century Palestine, which can be designated as “untouchables.” This group was composed of Samaritans, tax collectors, prostitutes, shepherds, lepers, Gentiles, and perhaps worst of all, Jews who became as Gentiles (e.g., the prodigal son of Lk 15:11-32). The rules of ritual purity as generally observed prevented any form of social contact between the upper class and the untouchables, and made contacts with the Am Ha Arez highly undesirable. Against this background, the horror of the Pharisees over Jesus’ association with tax collectors and sinners is throughly understandable (Mk 2:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>A further consequence of this religious criterion for determining social class and status was an uneasy tension between Jerusalem and the rural areas of Palestine, particularly Galilee, during the last two centuries of the second temple period. Those in Jerusalem regarded Galilee as a place where ignorance of the Torah was the rule (Jn 1:46). Jerusalem was primarily a religious center, whose major industry was the temple cult. The total population of Jerusalem in the first century <span>AD<\/span> has been estimated at 25,000 to 40,000. Most of these were either artisans and craftsmen devoted to building and adorning the temple (still incomplete before it was destroyed; see Jn 2:20) or priests and Levites involved in the many ritual activities of the temple. Though Jews were expected to travel to Jerusalem for each of the three annual pilgrimage festivals, this requirement proved difficult for rural Palestinian farmers.<\/p>\n<p>Further, the tithe demanded by Mosaic command was only on the produce of the land, not upon wages or bartered goods. The rural farmers, therefore, bore the brunt of this taxation and quite naturally resented the privileged position of urban artisans, merchants, and priests who were not obliged to tithe. The temptation not to tithe the produce of the land was very great, and many farmers succumbed to it. Their untithed produce was not kosher, and thus to be avoided by those, like the Pharisees, who were religiously scrupulous. In addition to the first and second tithes demanded of farmers (the second tithe had to be spent in the vicinity of Jerusalem), it has been estimated that Roman tax levies amounted to 10 to 15 percent of an individual’s income. Religious taxes, together with Roman taxes, added up to a crushing tax burden of from 25 to 30 percent. The fact that the Jews finally revolted against their Roman oppressors in <span>AD<\/span> 66 is not difficult to comprehend. Throughout the first century <span>AD<\/span>, in fact, minor revolts in Palestine occurred with predictable frequency. Many of these occurred during the three annual pilgrimage festivals in Jerusalem, when the normal population of 25,000 to 40,000 swelled to 500,000 or more. These festivals provided ideal opportunities for uprisings, and the Romans were particularly alert for such eventualities. Jesus was executed during one such Passover festival because he was suspected of being a political revolutionary (Mk 15:26).<\/p>\n<p>The second temple period provided the setting for the rise and fall of apocalypticism within Judaism. Apocalypticism (from a Greek word meaning “revelation”) was a kind of eschatology (“account of final events”) that assumed that ideal conditions could not be restored on earth unless God first intervened climactically to destroy evil (particularly foreign oppressors) and vindicate the righteous (Israel). Apocalyptic visionaries composed many documents, called apocalypses, in which they attempted to read the signs of the times and predict the coming of the visitation of God. Since there was a widespread consciousness that the era of prophecy was over, these apocalyptists wrote not under their own names but under the names of ancient Israelite worthies, such as Moses, Abraham, Enoch, and Ezra. Among the more significant expectations of Jewish apocalypticism were (1) the coming of a Messiah; (2) the coming of a great period of tribulation, sometimes called the messianic woes; (3) the resurrection of the just; (4) the judgment of the wicked and the reward of the righteous. Apocalyptic beliefs probably provided the motivation for most—if not all—of the Jewish revolts against the Romans.<\/p>\n\n<p>Some portions of the Hebrew Scriptures were still in the process of composition at the beginning of the second temple period. The last three prophetic books—Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi—were written from the end of the sixth century to the mid fifth century <span>BC<\/span>. Later rabbis expressed the opinion that the Spirit of God had been taken from Israel when these prophets ceased their labors. The Chronicler ends his work by referring to the decree of Cyrus (538 <span>BC<\/span>), and both Ezra-Nehemiah and Esther appear to have been written in the fifth century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The second temple period witnessed not only the completion of those writings that were later regarded as inspired and authoritative in Judaism but also the full recognition of all 24 sacred books. Prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in 586 <span>BC<\/span>, the Mosaic law had not been observed with any consistency (according to 2 Kgs 22 it had been mislaid for an unknown period of time), nor had the classical prophets always received appropriate recognition. But after 586 <span>BC<\/span> the Torah occupied a position of unquestioned sanctity in the lives and thoughts of the Jewish people, replacing in many respects the temple cult even before its final dissolution in <span>AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\n<p>The Jewish Scriptures are divided into three sections, designated by Jews with the acrostic “Tanak”: (1) Torah (“Law” or “Revelation”), (2) Nebi’im (“Prophets”), and (3) Kethubim (“Writings”). It is generally claimed that while the Law and Prophets enjoyed canonical status prior to the second century <span>BC<\/span>, the Writings were finally declared canonical at the rabbinic council of Jamnia (c. <span>AD<\/span> 90), though the historicity of this is disputed. The rabbis are thought to have discussed whether certain biblical books should continue to be part of Scripture. In reality, the Jewish canon of Scripture was fully defined from traditional usage by the first century <span>BC<\/span>. The Law consisted of five books: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. The Prophets consisted of two sections, the Former Prophets (Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings) and the Latter Prophets (Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the 12 Minor Prophets). The Writings included Chronicles, Ezra-Nehemiah, Esther, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Lamentations, Ruth, and Daniel. The total number of books in this canon is 24, identical with the Protestant canon of 39 books, since Samuel, Kings, Chronicles, Ezra-Nehemiah, and the 12 are each counted as only one book. The Alexandrian canon of Hellenistic Judaism was more extensive, and the extra books (called Apocrypha by Protestants) are all found in the Roman Catholic OT canon of 46 books.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTalmudicPeriod\">The Talmudic Period (<span>AD<\/span> 73–425)<\/p>\n<h5>Historical Survey<\/h5>\n<p>According to Jewish legend, when the Romans were about to conquer Jerusalem in the revolt of <span>AD<\/span> 66–73, a prominent Pharisee, Rabbi Johanan ben Zakkai, feigned death and his disciples were permitted to carry him out of the besieged city in a coffin. The more likely scenario is that he received permission from the Romans to move his school from Jerusalem to Jamnia, on the coast of Palestine. The temple cult and the priestly system had disappeared, and rabbinic academies such as that of Rabbi Johanan set themselves to the enormous task of reconstructing Judaism. The older Sanhedrin was reinstituted as the Beth Din (“Court of Law”), and Gamaliel II, a grandson of Hillel, who had presided over the old Sanhedrin, became its leader with the title Nasi (“prince”), or Patriarch. The patriarchate continued until <span>AD<\/span> 425, when Emperor Theodosius II abolished the office upon the death of the last patriarch, Gamaliel VI. In Mesopotamia, Babylonian Judaism experienced a renaissance that lasted until the end of the fifth century <span>AD<\/span>. This period was called the Age of the Gaonim (“excellencies”) after the heads of the two great rabbinic academies at Sura and Pumpeditha. It was there that the great Babylonian Talmud was compiled by the fifth century <span>AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>In <span>AD<\/span> 115 various Jewish communities throughout the eastern Mediterranean, including Egypt, Cyprus, and Cyrene, revolted against the Roman emperor Trajan. Without exception these revolts were all put down by Roman legions. Finally, when the emperor Hadrian was on the brink of founding the new city of Aelia Capitolina on the site of old Jerusalem, the Jews again revolted in <span>AD<\/span> 132, led by a self-proclaimed messiah, Simeon Bar Koziba, who was called Bar-Kochba (“Son of a Star”) by his followers as an allusion to the messianic passage in Numbers 24:17. Bar-Kochba was aided by the famous rabbinic scholar Akiba. This revolt, though initially successful, was put down by the Romans under Julius Severus in 135. Shortly thereafter, Hadrian issued a decree banning all Jews from the new Aelia Capitolina.<\/p>\n<h5>Social and Religious Developments<\/h5>\n<p>During this period, the result of generations of rabbinical scholarship bore fruit with the compilation of the Babylonian and Jerusalem Talmuds. The rabbinic sages consciously saw themselves as the heirs of the ancient Israelite prophets, who in turn were the heirs of the Mosaic law. They distinguished consciously between their own legal interpretations of the Mosaic law (which they called Halakah, or “walking,” i.e., a guide for life), and the commands in the Torah itself (called Mitvah, or “commandment”). The oral law, developed through generations of rabbinic discussion, was finally compiled and written down through the efforts of the patriarch Judah ha-Nasi (c. <span>AD<\/span> 135–220) during the last quarter of the second century <span>AD<\/span> and became known as the Mishnah (“teaching”). This is a topical arrangement of rabbinic discussions on such subjects as the Sabbath, firstfruits, sacrifices, and women. The Mishnah became the basis for further rabbinic discussion in both Palestine and Babylonia. The decisions of sages who flourished after the writing of the Mishnah were compiled about <span>AD<\/span> 450 in Palestine and about 500 in Babylonia. This second stage beyond the Mishnah was called the Gemara (meaning either “completion” or “repetition”). The Mishnah and the Babylonian Gemara make up the Babylonian Talmud, while the same Mishnah with the Jerusalem or Palestinian Gemara comprises the Jerusalem Talmud. Yet another type of rabbinic literature is the Midrashim (“interpretations”), which either follow the order of a particular biblical book or consist of homilies on particular biblical texts. The Targums, paraphrastic translations of Scripture into the Aramaic language, finally came to be written down beginning in the late second century <span>AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>After the destruction of the temple, rabbinic Judaism concentrated on the religious significance of the Torah and elevated scholarship to the central role that it still plays in Judaism. Rabbinic Judaism gradually exerted its influence upon diaspora Judaism under the initial leadership of Rabbi Johanan until a kind of rabbinic orthodoxy emerged during the second century. Christianity was one of the major ideological foes of rabbinic Judaism. In order to purge Jewish Christians from their midst, the rabbis introduced an additional benediction to the eighteen benedictions customarily recited at synagogue services. This 19th benediction was a curse upon the <em>minim<\/em> (Christians and other heretics), which Jewish Christians who attended synagogue services found impossible to recite. The line was firmly drawn between Judaism and Christianity by this device, which was employed late in the first century.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dead Sea Scrolls; Essenes; Diaspora of the Jews; First Jewish Revolt; Israel, History of; Jew; Judah, Tribe of; Judaism; Pharisees; Philo, Judaeus; Postexilic Period; Sanhedrin; Talmud; Torah; Tradition; Tradition, Oral.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JUDAISM<\/h3>\n<p>Religion and culture of the Jewish people from the beginning of the postexilic period (538 <span>BC<\/span>) to modern times. The term “Judaism” is derived from “Judah,” the name of the southern kingdom of ancient Israel, while “Jew” is a shortened form of “Judeans.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheSecondTemple\">The Period of the Second Temple (515 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 70)<\/p>\n<h5>Historical Survey<\/h5>\n<p>The united kingdom of Israel under Saul, David, and Solomon came to an end shortly after the death of Solomon. Rehoboam, his son, provoked a revolt about 930 <span>BC<\/span> on the part of the 10 northern tribes by levying unreasonably high taxes (1 Kgs 12). From that time on, the kingdoms of Israel (or Samaria, the northern kingdom) and Judah (the southern kingdom) maintained a separate existence. The northern kingdom fell to the Assyrians in 722 <span>BC<\/span>, and thousands of captives, primarily members of the upper class, were exiled forcibly and taken to Assyria, where they presumably intermarried with the native population and disappeared from history. The kingdom of Judah survived as an independent state until 597 <span>BC<\/span>, when it came under the control of the Babylonians under Nebuchadnezzar. The temple was finally destroyed in 586 <span>BC<\/span> and many captives were carried off to Babylonia, beginning a period of exile that was to last two generations. The Babylonians were defeated by Cyrus the Persian in 539 <span>BC<\/span>, and the following year the king issued a decree permitting all captive peoples to return to the lands of their origin (2 Chr 36:22-23; Ezr 1). At least four waves of Jewish expatriates returned from Mesopotamia to Judea during the century following the decree of Cyrus, under such leaders as Sheshbazzar, Zerubbabel, Ezra, and Nehemiah. Many Jews, however, chose to remain in their adopted Mesopotamian homeland. The dedication of the second temple in the spring of 515 <span>BC<\/span> provided a formal end to the exilic period of 70 years (Jer 29:10), and was a direct result of the prophetic exhortations of Haggai and Zechariah.<\/p>\n<p>In Judea the Jewish people were ruled by governors who held office at the pleasure of the Persian king. One of the earlier governors was Zerubabbel (Hg 1:1; 2:1-2), a descendant of David (1 Chr 3:10-19). In some way he shared rule with the high priest Jeshua ben Jehozadak. Palestine was part of one of the 20 satrapies of the Persian Empire, which lasted from 539 to 331 <span>BC<\/span>, when it fell to the Greeks under Alexander the Great. Little is known about the historical developments in Palestine during most of the Persian period. When Alexander died in 323 <span>BC<\/span>, his empire was divided up among his generals; Egypt and Palestine fell to Ptolemy I. The Ptolemies were benevolent despots who allowed the Jews of Palestine a measure of freedom and autonomy. After the battle of Paneion in 198 <span>BC<\/span>, Palestine came under the rule of the Seleucid Empire, founded by Seleucus I, another of Alexander’s generals.<\/p>\n<p>The Seleucid Empire embraced a very large area with a diverse population, extending from Asia Minor and Palestine in the west to the borders of India on the east. Antiochus IV (Epiphanes) ascended the Seleucid throne in 175 <span>BC<\/span> and attempted to unify his vast empire by Hellenizing it (i.e., by forcing the adoption of Greek language and culture). Local cultures and religions were forcibly suppressed as a result of this policy, and the Jewish state in Palestine was perhaps the hardest hit of all. In 167 <span>BC<\/span> Antiochus IV dedicated the temple in Jerusalem to Olympian Zeus, sacrificed a sow on the altar, destroyed scrolls containing the Jewish Scriptures, and forbade the rite of circumcision. This repression triggered a revolt led by an aged priest named Mattathias and his sons. The Seleucids were repulsed, and finally in 164 <span>BC<\/span> the temple was retaken by Mattathias’s son Judas the Maccabee (an epithet meaning “the hammer”). This Jewish victory has been commemorated annually by the festival of Hanukkah (“dedication”). Judas and his brothers, called Maccabees or Hasmoneans (Mattathias was of the house of Hasmon), and their descendants ruled Judea from 164 to 63 <span>BC<\/span>, when Palestine fell to the Roman general Pompey. Thereafter, Palestine remained a vassal of Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Hyrcanus, a Hasmonean, was high priest after the conquest of Judea by the Romans, though Antipater (an Idumean) was the real power behind Hyrcanus. The sons of Antipater, Phasael and Herod, were governors of Jerusalem and Galilee, respectively. Upon the assassination of Antipater in 43 <span>BC<\/span>, and through his connections in Rome, Herod (later called Herod the Great) was named king of Judea by the Roman senate; he reigned from 37 to 4 <span>BC<\/span>. When he died, Palestine was divided up by the emperor Augustus (27 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 14) and placed under the governorship of three of Herod’s sons: Herod Archelaus (ethnarch of Judea, Idumea, and Samaria from 4 <span>BC<\/span> to <span>AD<\/span> 6), Herod Antipas (tetrarch of Galilee and Perea from 4 <span>BC<\/span> to <span>AD<\/span> 39), and Herod Philip (tetrarch of Batanea, Trachonitis, and other small states from 4 <span>BC<\/span> to <span>AD<\/span> 34). These territories were generally placed under Roman procurators after the sons of Herod had died or been deposed. For a brief period (<span>AD<\/span> 41–44), Herod Agrippa I, the grandson of Herod the Great, ruled virtually the same territory as his grandfather. Upon his death (narrated in Acts 12:20-23), his territories were placed under Roman procurators. The greed and ineptitude of these procurators provoked the Jewish populace to rebel. The ill-fated Jewish revolt of <span>AD<\/span> 66–73 resulted in the destruction of the second temple by the tenth Roman legion under Titus in <span>AD<\/span> 70. The revolt was completely quelled in <span>AD<\/span> 73, when more than 900 Jews under siege in the desert fortress of Masada near the Dead Sea committed mass suicide rather than fall into Roman hands. These tragic events ended permanently the temple cult and the priestly system in Judaism.<\/p>\n<h5>Social and Religious Developments<\/h5>\n<p>The Babylonian conquest of Judea and the destruction of the Solomonic temple in 586 <span>BC<\/span> produced dramatic social and religious changes in Jewish life. The cessation of the temple cult struck a serious blow at the heart of the Israelite religion, since the Jerusalem temple alone was the legitimate and divinely appointed place for discharging much of the ritual requirement of the Mosaic law, chiefly the sacrificial cult. Even the three annual pilgrimage festivals, Succoth (Tabernacles), Pesach (Passover), and Shavuoth (Weeks) could no longer be observed by pious Jews who had remained in Judea after 586 <span>BC<\/span>. When after 538 <span>BC<\/span> many exiles chose to return to Judea, many others elected to remain in their new homeland. For the latter, the temple cult, even when reinstituted in 516 <span>BC<\/span>, could no longer play a significant role in their religious lives.<\/p>\n<p>During the exilic and early postexilic period, the peculiar Jewish institution of the synagogue (a Greek word meaning “gathering place”) began to evolve. The synagogue became such a popular and useful institution for Jewish communities outside Palestine that in the centuries after the dedication of the second temple they sprang up throughout Palestine, many in Jerusalem itself. By the end of the second temple period, the synagogue had come to play three important functions in Jewish life: it served as a house of prayer, a house of study, and a place of assembly. First-century <span>AD<\/span> synagogue worship is illustrated in Luke 4:16-30 and Acts 13:13-42. The focus of the service was a reading of a selection from the Torah (Law of Moses), then one from the Haphtorah (Prophets). These readings were followed by a homily based on Scripture. Other elements in first-century <span>AD<\/span> synagogue worship included the recitation of the Shema (“Hear, O Israel”), a combination of biblical passages including Deuteronomy 6:4-9; 11:13-21 and Numbers 15:37-41, and the Shemoneh Esreh (Eighteen Benedictions) called the Amidah (“standing”) because it was recited while standing upright. Jews also wore fringes on their garments in obedience to Numbers 15:38-39 (Mt 23:5), and phylacteries on their foreheads and left arms. Phylacteries are little boxes containing the portions of Scripture recited in Shema; they were used in literal fulfillment of the command in Deuteronomy 6:8. Archaeologists have discovered first-century phylacteries in the ruins of Masada.<\/p>\n<p>Outside of Palestine, Mesopotamia became the second most important center of Judaism. The Babylonian Jewish community was known as the Golah (“captivity”), and its titular head was called the Resh Galuta or Exilarch (both terms mean “leader of the captivity”). By the end of the exilic period, the descendants of the ancient original captives had forgotten Hebrew and had adopted Aramaic, the international language of the ancient Near East and sister language to Hebrew, as their first language. Even in Palestine, Aramaic was the primary language spoken. Thus, when portions of Scripture were read in synagogue services in Hebrew, most of those present were unable to understand what was read. This problem was solved by providing a methurgeman (translator) who would translate orally short sections of Scripture. Eventually these targums (“translations”) were reduced to writing, beginning in the second century <span>AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>By the first century <span>AD<\/span>, it had been estimated that there were from four to seven million Jews in the Greco-Roman world, perhaps three to four times the population of Palestine. Jews in lands outside of Palestine came to be known collectively as the Diaspora (“scattering”). After the Greeks dominated the Mediterranean world through Alexander and his successors, Greek became the common language throughout this region. Just as Mesopotamian Jews spoke Aramaic in place of Hebrew, so Jews in the Greco-Roman world came to speak Greek. By the middle of the third century <span>BC<\/span>, Hellenistic Jews began to translate the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek. This translation, called the Septuagint (a term meaning “seventy,” based on a legend that it was translated simultaneously by seventy Jewish scholars), contained a more extensive canon of Scripture than that recognized by Palestinian Judaism. This reflects the more liberal attitudes of Hellenistic Jews.<\/p>\n<p>During the second century <span>BC<\/span>, most of the major sects within Palestinian Judaism came into being. The Hasidim (“pious”) were members of a religious association that aided the Hasmoneans in the revolt against the Seleucids (1 Macc 2:42; 7:13) but later opposed them when they claimed rights to the priesthood. Both the Pharisees and Essenes may have their origin in this religious sect. The Sadducees were perhaps connected with Zadok, a high priest appointed by David. Zadok’s descendants were regarded as the only legitimate priestly line; they were devoted above the Levites in Ezekiel 40–48. The Sadducees were a wealthy, aristocratic class that monopolized the high priesthood. They did not believe in angels, spirits, life after death, or the resurrection (Acts 23:8), nor did they accept the validity of the oral law as developed by the Pharisees. They left no writings and disappeared with the destruction of the temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees (“separated ones”) first appear in our sources toward the end of the second century <span>BC<\/span> and were involved primarily in political affairs. They represented the common people against the tyrannical Hasmonean ruler Alexander Janneus (103–76 <span>BC<\/span>), who had hundreds of Pharisees executed in reprisal. By the first century <span>AD<\/span>, the Pharisees seem wholly concerned with religious matters and were noted for the scrupulous observance of the Mosaic law as traditionally interpreted. On grounds of ritual purity, they separated themselves from other Jews who were not as scrupulous and who might contaminate them. Pharisees went about in groups called Haberim (“associates”) in which they were insulated from those who were lax religiously. In their zeal to remain faithful to the Mosaic law, the Pharisees developed an oral law (later erroneously attributed to Moses) that served as a fence around the Torah. This oral law was an interpretation and expansion of the 613 commands in the Mosaic law; it was finally compiled and reduced to written form as the Mishnah (“teaching”) in the late second century <span>AD<\/span>. Paul (Acts 22:3; 23:6; 26:5; Phil 3:5) and many other early Christians were converts from Pharisaism (Acts 15:5). Pharisaic Judaism survived the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 to form the rabbinic Judaism that dominated Jewish religious life from the second century <span>AD<\/span> to modern times.<\/p>\n<p>The Essenes were another religious sect within Judaism that had its origins in the second century <span>BC<\/span>. Like the Pharisees, the Essenes were concerned principally with maintaining ritual purity in obedience to the law of Moses. The Essenes lived and worked in Jewish society; they tried to influence people by the simple, altruistic life they followed. Some Essenes also lived in their own communities, to which they returned each night after work. There were numerous religious factions within Judaism, and one such group, which may only have had vague connections with the Essenes, established a community on the western shore of the Dead Sea. This group regarded itself as the true Israel and in the wilderness prepared for the final visitation of God by keeping themselves pure from all defilement. Many documents written by members of this sect were discovered in caves near the Dead Sea where they had been hidden just before the Romans destroyed the settlement. These documents, the Dead Sea Scrolls, have provided detailed information about this religious sect and its beliefs.<\/p>\n<p>The Zealots were another Jewish sect, who may be related to the Sicarii (“dagger men”). This group of political activists flourished from <span>AD<\/span> 6 to 66. Regarding God alone as their sovereign, they attempted to overthrow the Romans and those who collaborated with them by violent means, including assassination. They helped to foment the Jewish revolt of <span>AD<\/span> 66–73 and perished with Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\n<p>Social class and status in first-century <span>AD<\/span> Palestine were determined in accordance with the rules of ritual purity. The upper class comprised members of the religious establishment, such as the Sadducees, scribes, Pharisees, and Jerusalem priests. The Sanhedrin was a deliberative body whose membership was drawn from these groups. For all practical purposes there was no middle class. The lower class consisted primarily of the Am Ha Arez (“people of the land”)—Jews who were ignorant of the law through lack of education and who did not scrupulously observe those commandments with which they were familiar. The generally hostile attitude of the Pharisees toward the Am Ha Arez is expressed in John 7:49: “But this crowd, who do not know the law, are accursed” (<span>rsv<\/span>). There was yet another social class in first-century Palestine, which can be designated as “untouchables.” This group was composed of Samaritans, tax collectors, prostitutes, shepherds, lepers, Gentiles, and perhaps worst of all, Jews who became as Gentiles (e.g., the prodigal son of Lk 15:11-32). The rules of ritual purity as generally observed prevented any form of social contact between the upper class and the untouchables, and made contacts with the Am Ha Arez highly undesirable. Against this background, the horror of the Pharisees over Jesus’ association with tax collectors and sinners is throughly understandable (Mk 2:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>A further consequence of this religious criterion for determining social class and status was an uneasy tension between Jerusalem and the rural areas of Palestine, particularly Galilee, during the last two centuries of the second temple period. Those in Jerusalem regarded Galilee as a place where ignorance of the Torah was the rule (Jn 1:46). Jerusalem was primarily a religious center, whose major industry was the temple cult. The total population of Jerusalem in the first century <span>AD<\/span> has been estimated at 25,000 to 40,000. Most of these were either artisans and craftsmen devoted to building and adorning the temple (still incomplete before it was destroyed; see Jn 2:20) or priests and Levites involved in the many ritual activities of the temple. Though Jews were expected to travel to Jerusalem for each of the three annual pilgrimage festivals, this requirement proved difficult for rural Palestinian farmers.<\/p>\n<p>Further, the tithe demanded by Mosaic command was only on the produce of the land, not upon wages or bartered goods. The rural farmers, therefore, bore the brunt of this taxation and quite naturally resented the privileged position of urban artisans, merchants, and priests who were not obliged to tithe. The temptation not to tithe the produce of the land was very great, and many farmers succumbed to it. Their untithed produce was not kosher, and thus to be avoided by those, like the Pharisees, who were religiously scrupulous. In addition to the first and second tithes demanded of farmers (the second tithe had to be spent in the vicinity of Jerusalem), it has been estimated that Roman tax levies amounted to 10 to 15 percent of an individual’s income. Religious taxes, together with Roman taxes, added up to a crushing tax burden of from 25 to 30 percent. The fact that the Jews finally revolted against their Roman oppressors in <span>AD<\/span> 66 is not difficult to comprehend. Throughout the first century <span>AD<\/span>, in fact, minor revolts in Palestine occurred with predictable frequency. Many of these occurred during the three annual pilgrimage festivals in Jerusalem, when the normal population of 25,000 to 40,000 swelled to 500,000 or more. These festivals provided ideal opportunities for uprisings, and the Romans were particularly alert for such eventualities. Jesus was executed during one such Passover festival because he was suspected of being a political revolutionary (Mk 15:26).<\/p>\n<p>The second temple period provided the setting for the rise and fall of apocalypticism within Judaism. Apocalypticism (from a Greek word meaning “revelation”) was a kind of eschatology (“account of final events”) that assumed that ideal conditions could not be restored on earth unless God first intervened climactically to destroy evil (particularly foreign oppressors) and vindicate the righteous (Israel). Apocalyptic visionaries composed many documents, called apocalypses, in which they attempted to read the signs of the times and predict the coming of the visitation of God. Since there was a widespread consciousness that the era of prophecy was over, these apocalyptists wrote not under their own names but under the names of ancient Israelite worthies, such as Moses, Abraham, Enoch, and Ezra. Among the more significant expectations of Jewish apocalypticism were (1) the coming of a Messiah; (2) the coming of a great period of tribulation, sometimes called the messianic woes; (3) the resurrection of the just; (4) the judgment of the wicked and the reward of the righteous. Apocalyptic beliefs probably provided the motivation for most—if not all—of the Jewish revolts against the Romans.<\/p>\n\n<p>Some portions of the Hebrew Scriptures were still in the process of composition at the beginning of the second temple period. The last three prophetic books—Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi—were written from the end of the sixth century to the mid fifth century <span>BC<\/span>. Later rabbis expressed the opinion that the Spirit of God had been taken from Israel when these prophets ceased their labors. The Chronicler ends his work by referring to the decree of Cyrus (538 <span>BC<\/span>), and both Ezra-Nehemiah and Esther appear to have been written in the fifth century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The second temple period witnessed not only the completion of those writings that were later regarded as inspired and authoritative in Judaism but also the full recognition of all 24 sacred books. Prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in 586 <span>BC<\/span>, the Mosaic law had not been observed with any consistency (according to 2 Kgs 22 it had been mislaid for an unknown period of time), nor had the classical prophets always received appropriate recognition. But after 586 <span>BC<\/span> the Torah occupied a position of unquestioned sanctity in the lives and thoughts of the Jewish people, replacing in many respects the temple cult even before its final dissolution in <span>AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\n<p>The Jewish Scriptures are divided into three sections, designated by Jews with the acrostic “Tanak”: (1) Torah (“Law” or “Revelation”), (2) Nebi’im (“Prophets”), and (3) Kethubim (“Writings”). It is generally claimed that while the Law and Prophets enjoyed canonical status prior to the second century <span>BC<\/span>, the Writings were finally declared canonical at the rabbinic council of Jamnia (c. <span>AD<\/span> 90), though the historicity of this is disputed. The rabbis are thought to have discussed whether certain biblical books should continue to be part of Scripture. In reality, the Jewish canon of Scripture was fully defined from traditional usage by the first century <span>BC<\/span>. The Law consisted of five books: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. The Prophets consisted of two sections, the Former Prophets (Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings) and the Latter Prophets (Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the 12 Minor Prophets). The Writings included Chronicles, Ezra-Nehemiah, Esther, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Lamentations, Ruth, and Daniel. The total number of books in this canon is 24, identical with the Protestant canon of 39 books, since Samuel, Kings, Chronicles, Ezra-Nehemiah, and the 12 are each counted as only one book. The Alexandrian canon of Hellenistic Judaism was more extensive, and the extra books (called Apocrypha by Protestants) are all found in the Roman Catholic OT canon of 46 books.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTalmudicPeriod\">The Talmudic Period (<span>AD<\/span> 73–425)<\/p>\n<h5>Historical Survey<\/h5>\n<p>According to Jewish legend, when the Romans were about to conquer Jerusalem in the revolt of <span>AD<\/span> 66–73, a prominent Pharisee, Rabbi Johanan ben Zakkai, feigned death and his disciples were permitted to carry him out of the besieged city in a coffin. The more likely scenario is that he received permission from the Romans to move his school from Jerusalem to Jamnia, on the coast of Palestine. The temple cult and the priestly system had disappeared, and rabbinic academies such as that of Rabbi Johanan set themselves to the enormous task of reconstructing Judaism. The older Sanhedrin was reinstituted as the Beth Din (“Court of Law”), and Gamaliel II, a grandson of Hillel, who had presided over the old Sanhedrin, became its leader with the title Nasi (“prince”), or Patriarch. The patriarchate continued until <span>AD<\/span> 425, when Emperor Theodosius II abolished the office upon the death of the last patriarch, Gamaliel VI. In Mesopotamia, Babylonian Judaism experienced a renaissance that lasted until the end of the fifth century <span>AD<\/span>. This period was called the Age of the Gaonim (“excellencies”) after the heads of the two great rabbinic academies at Sura and Pumpeditha. It was there that the great Babylonian Talmud was compiled by the fifth century <span>AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>In <span>AD<\/span> 115 various Jewish communities throughout the eastern Mediterranean, including Egypt, Cyprus, and Cyrene, revolted against the Roman emperor Trajan. Without exception these revolts were all put down by Roman legions. Finally, when the emperor Hadrian was on the brink of founding the new city of Aelia Capitolina on the site of old Jerusalem, the Jews again revolted in <span>AD<\/span> 132, led by a self-proclaimed messiah, Simeon Bar Koziba, who was called Bar-Kochba (“Son of a Star”) by his followers as an allusion to the messianic passage in Numbers 24:17. Bar-Kochba was aided by the famous rabbinic scholar Akiba. This revolt, though initially successful, was put down by the Romans under Julius Severus in 135. Shortly thereafter, Hadrian issued a decree banning all Jews from the new Aelia Capitolina.<\/p>\n<h5>Social and Religious Developments<\/h5>\n<p>During this period, the result of generations of rabbinical scholarship bore fruit with the compilation of the Babylonian and Jerusalem Talmuds. The rabbinic sages consciously saw themselves as the heirs of the ancient Israelite prophets, who in turn were the heirs of the Mosaic law. They distinguished consciously between their own legal interpretations of the Mosaic law (which they called Halakah, or “walking,” i.e., a guide for life), and the commands in the Torah itself (called Mitvah, or “commandment”). The oral law, developed through generations of rabbinic discussion, was finally compiled and written down through the efforts of the patriarch Judah ha-Nasi (c. <span>AD<\/span> 135–220) during the last quarter of the second century <span>AD<\/span> and became known as the Mishnah (“teaching”). This is a topical arrangement of rabbinic discussions on such subjects as the Sabbath, firstfruits, sacrifices, and women. The Mishnah became the basis for further rabbinic discussion in both Palestine and Babylonia. The decisions of sages who flourished after the writing of the Mishnah were compiled about <span>AD<\/span> 450 in Palestine and about 500 in Babylonia. This second stage beyond the Mishnah was called the Gemara (meaning either “completion” or “repetition”). The Mishnah and the Babylonian Gemara make up the Babylonian Talmud, while the same Mishnah with the Jerusalem or Palestinian Gemara comprises the Jerusalem Talmud. Yet another type of rabbinic literature is the Midrashim (“interpretations”), which either follow the order of a particular biblical book or consist of homilies on particular biblical texts. The Targums, paraphrastic translations of Scripture into the Aramaic language, finally came to be written down beginning in the late second century <span>AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>After the destruction of the temple, rabbinic Judaism concentrated on the religious significance of the Torah and elevated scholarship to the central role that it still plays in Judaism. Rabbinic Judaism gradually exerted its influence upon diaspora Judaism under the initial leadership of Rabbi Johanan until a kind of rabbinic orthodoxy emerged during the second century. Christianity was one of the major ideological foes of rabbinic Judaism. In order to purge Jewish Christians from their midst, the rabbis introduced an additional benediction to the eighteen benedictions customarily recited at synagogue services. This 19th benediction was a curse upon the <em>minim<\/em> (Christians and other heretics), which Jewish Christians who attended synagogue services found impossible to recite. The line was firmly drawn between Judaism and Christianity by this device, which was employed late in the first century.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dead Sea Scrolls; Essenes; Diaspora of the Jews; First Jewish Revolt; Israel, History of; Jew; Judah, Tribe of; Judaism; Pharisees; Philo, Judaeus; Postexilic Period; Sanhedrin; Talmud; Torah; Tradition; Tradition, Oral.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JUDAISM Religion and culture of the Jewish people from the beginning of the postexilic period (538 BC) to modern times. The term “Judaism” is derived from “Judah,” the name of the southern kingdom of ancient Israel, while “Jew” is a shortened form of “Judeans.” The Period of the Second Temple (515 BC–AD 70) Historical Survey The united kingdom of Israel under Saul, David, and Solomon came to an end shortly after the death of Solomon. Rehoboam, his son, provoked a revolt about 930 BC on the pa...","summary_en":"JUDAISM Religion and culture of the Jewish people from the beginning of the postexilic period (538 BC) to modern times. The term “Judaism” is derived from “Judah,” the name of the southern kingdom of ancient Israel, while “Jew” is a shortened form of “Judeans.” The Period of the Second Temple (515 BC–AD 70) Historical Survey The united kingdom of Israel under Saul, David, and Solomon came to an end shortly after the death of Solomon. Rehoboam, his son, provoked a revolt about 930 BC on the pa...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":27095,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Nazarene","title_en":"Nazarene","content_ro":"<h3>NAZARENE<\/h3>\n<p>Native or inhabitant of Nazareth, a NT town in lower Galilee.<\/p>\n<p>Nazareth was Jesus’ hometown during the first 30 years of his life. Since the name Jesus was a common name among the Jews, and since surnames were not used, perhaps the designation Nazarene differentiated Jesus of Nazareth from others with the same name (see Greek texts of Mt 27:16-17; Acts 7:45; Col 4:11; and Heb 4:8, where the name Jesus refers to other men).<\/p>\n<p>In the original texts, the designation Jesus the Nazarene was used by demons (Mk 1:24; Lk 4:34), the crowd outside Jericho (Mk 10:47; Lk 18:37), a servant girl (Mk 14:67), soldiers (Jn 18:5-7), Pilate (Jn 19:19), the two disciples on the road to Emmaus (Lk 24:19), and the angel at the tomb (Mk 16:6).<\/p>\n<p>The apostles in Acts used the designation to identify Jesus. Peter speaks of Jesus the Nazarene in his sermon on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:22), and at the temple gate in a subsequent healing (3:6; 4:10). Paul identifies Jesus as such in Acts 26:9.<\/p>\n<p>One hostile reference to the name is in Acts 6:14. The false witnesses against Stephen accused him before the Sanhedrin of saying, “This Nazarene, Jesus, will destroy this place [temple] and alter the customs that Moses handed down to us” (see Greek). Another antagonistic reference is in Acts 24:5, the only reference to Jesus’ followers as Nazarenes. Tertullus accused Paul, saying, “For we have found him to be a troublemaker, a man who is constantly inciting the Jews throughout the world to riots and rebellions against the Roman government. He is a ringleader of the sect known as the Nazarenes” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>With regard to the name “Nazarene,” Matthew 2:23 has always been problematic: “So they went and lived in a town called Nazareth. This fulfilled what was spoken by the prophets concerning the Messiah: ‘He will be called a Nazarene’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>). No OT prophecy directly states that the Messiah would be called a Nazarene. Some scholars relate Matthew’s reference to Isaiah 11:1, which speaks of the Messiah as a Branch, a Hebrew term derived from the same root as “Nazareth.” Others suggest that the OT prophecies concern the despising and reviling of the Messiah as having been thought by others to be a Nazarene, when it was well known that the Messiah was supposed to come from Bethlehem, the city of David. Of course, that is where Jesus was born, but he was raised in Nazareth and subsequently was known as a Nazarene and thereby ridiculed. Thus, the prophecy was fulfilled when some of his contemporaries called him a Nazarene, from the despised town of Nazareth (Jn 1:46; cf. Mt 13:54; Mk 6:2-3; Lk 4:22).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Nazareth.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NAZARENE<\/h3>\n<p>Native or inhabitant of Nazareth, a NT town in lower Galilee.<\/p>\n<p>Nazareth was Jesus’ hometown during the first 30 years of his life. Since the name Jesus was a common name among the Jews, and since surnames were not used, perhaps the designation Nazarene differentiated Jesus of Nazareth from others with the same name (see Greek texts of Mt 27:16-17; Acts 7:45; Col 4:11; and Heb 4:8, where the name Jesus refers to other men).<\/p>\n<p>In the original texts, the designation Jesus the Nazarene was used by demons (Mk 1:24; Lk 4:34), the crowd outside Jericho (Mk 10:47; Lk 18:37), a servant girl (Mk 14:67), soldiers (Jn 18:5-7), Pilate (Jn 19:19), the two disciples on the road to Emmaus (Lk 24:19), and the angel at the tomb (Mk 16:6).<\/p>\n<p>The apostles in Acts used the designation to identify Jesus. Peter speaks of Jesus the Nazarene in his sermon on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:22), and at the temple gate in a subsequent healing (3:6; 4:10). Paul identifies Jesus as such in Acts 26:9.<\/p>\n<p>One hostile reference to the name is in Acts 6:14. The false witnesses against Stephen accused him before the Sanhedrin of saying, “This Nazarene, Jesus, will destroy this place [temple] and alter the customs that Moses handed down to us” (see Greek). Another antagonistic reference is in Acts 24:5, the only reference to Jesus’ followers as Nazarenes. Tertullus accused Paul, saying, “For we have found him to be a troublemaker, a man who is constantly inciting the Jews throughout the world to riots and rebellions against the Roman government. He is a ringleader of the sect known as the Nazarenes” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>With regard to the name “Nazarene,” Matthew 2:23 has always been problematic: “So they went and lived in a town called Nazareth. This fulfilled what was spoken by the prophets concerning the Messiah: ‘He will be called a Nazarene’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>). No OT prophecy directly states that the Messiah would be called a Nazarene. Some scholars relate Matthew’s reference to Isaiah 11:1, which speaks of the Messiah as a Branch, a Hebrew term derived from the same root as “Nazareth.” Others suggest that the OT prophecies concern the despising and reviling of the Messiah as having been thought by others to be a Nazarene, when it was well known that the Messiah was supposed to come from Bethlehem, the city of David. Of course, that is where Jesus was born, but he was raised in Nazareth and subsequently was known as a Nazarene and thereby ridiculed. Thus, the prophecy was fulfilled when some of his contemporaries called him a Nazarene, from the despised town of Nazareth (Jn 1:46; cf. Mt 13:54; Mk 6:2-3; Lk 4:22).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Nazareth.<\/p>","summary_ro":"NAZARENE Native or inhabitant of Nazareth, a NT town in lower Galilee. Nazareth was Jesus’ hometown during the first 30 years of his life. Since the name Jesus was a common name among the Jews, and since surnames were not used, perhaps the designation Nazarene differentiated Jesus of Nazareth from others with the same name (see Greek texts of Mt 27:16-17; Acts 7:45; Col 4:11; and Heb 4:8, where the name Jesus refers to other men). In the original texts, the designation Jesus the Nazarene was ...","summary_en":"NAZARENE Native or inhabitant of Nazareth, a NT town in lower Galilee. Nazareth was Jesus’ hometown during the first 30 years of his life. Since the name Jesus was a common name among the Jews, and since surnames were not used, perhaps the designation Nazarene differentiated Jesus of Nazareth from others with the same name (see Greek texts of Mt 27:16-17; Acts 7:45; Col 4:11; and Heb 4:8, where the name Jesus refers to other men). In the original texts, the designation Jesus the Nazarene was ...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":27101,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Nazareth","title_en":"Nazareth","content_ro":"<h3>NAZARETH<\/h3>\n<p>Village in the Roman province of Galilee, the home of Joseph, Mary, and Jesus. Always small and isolated, Nazareth is not mentioned in the OT, the Apocrypha, intertestamental Jewish writings, or the histories of Josephus. The town lies just north of the plain of Esdraelon in the limestone hills of the southern Lebanon range. It is situated on three sides of a hill. This location forms a sheltered valley with a moderate climate favorable to fruits and wildflowers. Trade routes and roads passed near Nazareth, but the village itself was not on any main road. Nazareth is about 15 miles (24.1 kilometers) west of the Sea of Galilee and 20 miles (32.2 kilometers) east of the Mediterranean. Jerusalem lies about 70 miles (112.6 kilometers) south. Archaeological remains indicate that the ancient town was higher on the western hill than the present village (cf. Lk 4:29). In the time of Christ, Nazareth, along with the entire region of south Galilee, lay outside the mainstream of Jewish life, providing the background for Nathanael’s wry remark to Philip, “Can anything good come out of Nazareth?” (Jn 1:46).<\/p>\n\n<p>Nazareth is first mentioned in the NT as the home of Mary and Joseph (Lk 1:26-27). Sometime after Jesus was born at his parents’ ancestral town of Bethlehem (about 80 miles, or 128.7 kilometers, to the south), Mary and Joseph returned to Nazareth (Mt 2:23; Lk 2:39). Jesus grew up there (Lk 2:39-40, 51), leaving the village to be baptized by John in the Jordan River (Mk 1:9). When John was arrested, Jesus moved to Capernaum (Mt 4:13). Though Jesus was often identified by his boyhood city as “Jesus of Nazareth” (see Mk 10:47; Jn 18:5, 7; Acts 2:22), the NT records only one subsequent visit by Jesus to Nazareth. On this occasion, Jesus preached in the synagogue and was rejected by the townspeople (Lk 4:16-30; cf. Mt 13:54-58; Mk 6:1-6). Jesus’ followers were also derisively called “Nazarenes” (Acts 24:5).<\/p>\n\n<p>Nazareth remained a Jewish city until the time of the emperor Constantine (d. <span>AD<\/span> 327), when it became a sacred place for Christian pilgrims. A large basilica was built in Nazareth about <span>AD<\/span> 600. Arabs and Crusaders alternately controlled the village until 1517, when it fell to the Turks, who forced all Christians to leave. Christians returned in 1620, and the town became an important Christian center.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Nazarene.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NAZARETH<\/h3>\n<p>Village in the Roman province of Galilee, the home of Joseph, Mary, and Jesus. Always small and isolated, Nazareth is not mentioned in the OT, the Apocrypha, intertestamental Jewish writings, or the histories of Josephus. The town lies just north of the plain of Esdraelon in the limestone hills of the southern Lebanon range. It is situated on three sides of a hill. This location forms a sheltered valley with a moderate climate favorable to fruits and wildflowers. Trade routes and roads passed near Nazareth, but the village itself was not on any main road. Nazareth is about 15 miles (24.1 kilometers) west of the Sea of Galilee and 20 miles (32.2 kilometers) east of the Mediterranean. Jerusalem lies about 70 miles (112.6 kilometers) south. Archaeological remains indicate that the ancient town was higher on the western hill than the present village (cf. Lk 4:29). In the time of Christ, Nazareth, along with the entire region of south Galilee, lay outside the mainstream of Jewish life, providing the background for Nathanael’s wry remark to Philip, “Can anything good come out of Nazareth?” (Jn 1:46).<\/p>\n\n<p>Nazareth is first mentioned in the NT as the home of Mary and Joseph (Lk 1:26-27). Sometime after Jesus was born at his parents’ ancestral town of Bethlehem (about 80 miles, or 128.7 kilometers, to the south), Mary and Joseph returned to Nazareth (Mt 2:23; Lk 2:39). Jesus grew up there (Lk 2:39-40, 51), leaving the village to be baptized by John in the Jordan River (Mk 1:9). When John was arrested, Jesus moved to Capernaum (Mt 4:13). Though Jesus was often identified by his boyhood city as “Jesus of Nazareth” (see Mk 10:47; Jn 18:5, 7; Acts 2:22), the NT records only one subsequent visit by Jesus to Nazareth. On this occasion, Jesus preached in the synagogue and was rejected by the townspeople (Lk 4:16-30; cf. Mt 13:54-58; Mk 6:1-6). Jesus’ followers were also derisively called “Nazarenes” (Acts 24:5).<\/p>\n\n<p>Nazareth remained a Jewish city until the time of the emperor Constantine (d. <span>AD<\/span> 327), when it became a sacred place for Christian pilgrims. A large basilica was built in Nazareth about <span>AD<\/span> 600. Arabs and Crusaders alternately controlled the village until 1517, when it fell to the Turks, who forced all Christians to leave. Christians returned in 1620, and the town became an important Christian center.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Nazarene.<\/p>","summary_ro":"NAZARETH Village in the Roman province of Galilee, the home of Joseph, Mary, and Jesus. Always small and isolated, Nazareth is not mentioned in the OT, the Apocrypha, intertestamental Jewish writings, or the histories of Josephus. The town lies just north of the plain of Esdraelon in the limestone hills of the southern Lebanon range. It is situated on three sides of a hill. This location forms a sheltered valley with a moderate climate favorable to fruits and wildflowers. Trade routes and roa...","summary_en":"NAZARETH Village in the Roman province of Galilee, the home of Joseph, Mary, and Jesus. Always small and isolated, Nazareth is not mentioned in the OT, the Apocrypha, intertestamental Jewish writings, or the histories of Josephus. The town lies just north of the plain of Esdraelon in the limestone hills of the southern Lebanon range. It is situated on three sides of a hill. This location forms a sheltered valley with a moderate climate favorable to fruits and wildflowers. Trade routes and roa...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56335,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:46","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:46","content_ro":"<p><strong>1:46<\/strong> <em>Can anything good come from Nazareth?<\/em> This village was not considered famous enough to be the hometown for a great leader (cp. Matt 13:53-58).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>1:46<\/strong> <em>Can anything good come from Nazareth?<\/em> This village was not considered famous enough to be the hometown for a great leader (cp. Matt 13:53-58).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:46 Can anything good come from Nazareth? This village was not considered famous enough to be the hometown for a great leader (cp. Matt 13:53-58).","summary_en":"1:46 Can anything good come from Nazareth? This village was not considered famous enough to be the hometown for a great leader (cp. Matt 13:53-58).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83961,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:46","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:46","content_ro":"<p><strong>1:46<\/strong> <em>Can anything good come from Nazareth?<\/em> This village was not considered famous enough to be the hometown for a great leader (cp. Matt 13:53-58).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>1:46<\/strong> <em>Can anything good come from Nazareth?<\/em> This village was not considered famous enough to be the hometown for a great leader (cp. Matt 13:53-58).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:46 Can anything good come from Nazareth? This village was not considered famous enough to be the hometown for a great leader (cp. Matt 13:53-58).","summary_en":"1:46 Can anything good come from Nazareth? This village was not considered famous enough to be the hometown for a great leader (cp. Matt 13:53-58).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111587,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:46","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:46","content_ro":"<p><strong>1:46<\/strong> <em>Can anything good come from Nazareth?<\/em> This village was not considered famous enough to be the hometown for a great leader (cp. Matt 13:53-58).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>1:46<\/strong> <em>Can anything good come from Nazareth?<\/em> This village was not considered famous enough to be the hometown for a great leader (cp. Matt 13:53-58).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:46 Can anything good come from Nazareth? This village was not considered famous enough to be the hometown for a great leader (cp. Matt 13:53-58).","summary_en":"1:46 Can anything good come from Nazareth? This village was not considered famous enough to be the hometown for a great leader (cp. Matt 13:53-58).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139213,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:46","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:46","content_ro":"<p><strong>1:46<\/strong> <em>Can anything good come from Nazareth?<\/em> This village was not considered famous enough to be the hometown for a great leader (cp. Matt 13:53-58).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>1:46<\/strong> <em>Can anything good come from Nazareth?<\/em> This village was not considered famous enough to be the hometown for a great leader (cp. Matt 13:53-58).<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:46 Can anything good come from Nazareth? This village was not considered famous enough to be the hometown for a great leader (cp. Matt 13:53-58).","summary_en":"1:46 Can anything good come from Nazareth? This village was not considered famous enough to be the hometown for a great leader (cp. Matt 13:53-58).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"47":[{"id":19804,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jew","title_en":"Jew","content_ro":"<h3>JEW<\/h3>\n<p>Judean, belonging to Judah. The short form of the English word was developed from the French. The underlying Hebrew word is used first in 2 Kings 16:6 as a national term, meaning citizens of Judah. It came into general use in the period of Jeremiah just before the exile (late sixth century <span>BC<\/span>; see Jer 32:12). It reflects a growing sense of national identity among foreign nations in an international world. In Jeremiah 34:9, a statement concerning the national principle that an individual citizen had the right to freedom from slavery uses the term “Jew.” In Jeremiah 52:28 it is poignantly used in giving the number of deported citizens.<\/p>\n<p>Once the people were in exile, the term’s national meaning was expanded with a religious one. The Jews were different from surrounding peoples in that they preserved a living religious tradition of one true God. A Jewish-Gentile polarization developed. Thus in Daniel 3:8-12 certain Jews are accused of deviating from otherwise acceptable Babylonian religious practices. The book of Esther is concerned with the problem of Jewish identity and survival in a hostile alien environment. Esther 8:17 speaks of Gentiles declaring themselves Jews in the religious sense of becoming proselytes.<\/p>\n<p>After the exile, the strongly religious meaning of “Jew” is expressed in the prophecy of Zechariah 8:23 that the Jew would be courted by Gentiles because God was with him. In Ezra 4:12 the term “Jews” is the national designation of the returned exiles, as it is in the book of Nehemiah (e.g., Neh 1:2; 4:2). In Nehemiah 13:24 there is a consciousness of the social exclusiveness of the Jews: on religious grounds, marriage to foreigners is deplored.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT “Jew” continues to have the same national and\/or religious meaning. Culturally, Jews have religious and other customs that NT documents addressed to Gentiles find it necessary to explain (Mk 7:3; Jn 5:1; 19:40). Jews are contrasted with Gentiles (Acts 11:19), Samaritans (Jn 4:9, 22), and proselytes (Acts 2:10). Jewish Christians can be called “Jews” (Gal 2:13), but there is an increasing stress on the religious distinctions between Jew and Christian. In Romans 2:17-29 Paul gives an interesting theological analysis of the term “Jew.” He is at pains to emphasize that the true meaning of the word lies not in outward religious profession but in an inward attitude to God. Paul was doubtless thinking of the inadequacy of his own life as a Jew before he was converted to the Christian faith (cf. Phil 3:3-6). His mention of “praise” in Romans 2:29 is the climax of the passage. It is a forceful play on words: in Hebrew, Judah means praise (Gn 29:35; cf. 49:8).<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul is here moving in the direction of regarding Christianity as the true heir of the faith of the OT. Revelation 2:9 and 3:9 express similar sentiments: to be truly a Jew is much more than a matter of birth and synagogue observance. Underlying these passages in both Revelation and Romans is obviously the issue of the messianic claims of Jesus (cf. Rom 9:3-5; 10:1-4). The NT bears sad testimony to the opposition of Jews to the Christian message. The gospel proved a cause of offense to the Jews (1 Cor 1:23). Paul himself, despite his claim of impeccable Jewish credentials (Acts 26:4-7), found himself the object of bitter Jewish attacks (21:11; 23:12, 27). Revelation 2:9 and 3:9 describe the Jews’ opposition as satanic: they were carrying out the work of God’s adversary, Satan.<\/p>\n<p>These negative overtones are especially attached to the use of the word “Jew” in John’s Gospel. It is found some 70 times, versus about five or six instances in each of the synoptic Gospels. Some passages, such as those already cited, have no associations of hostility. But in most cases the fourth Gospel uses “Jews” in the sense of the religious authorities, especially those in Jerusalem, who were hostile to Jesus (see, e.g., Jn 5:18; 9:18; 11:8; 18:36). It is noteworthy that in 9:22 the parents of the blind man, clearly Jews themselves, are said, literally, to fear the investigating Jews. In 18:14 “Jews” stands for the chief priests and Pharisees of 18:3. It must be emphasized that the author, who was obviously a Jew himself, was not expressing an anti-Semitic viewpoint as such. He condemned not race or people but those who opposed Jesus. He gladly acknowledged that some Jews put their faith in Jesus (8:31; 11:45: 12:11). Nathanael is featured as a type of the Christian Jew, a true Israelite “in whom is no guile” (1:47; cf. v 31; see Gn 27:35; 32:28).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Diaspora of the Jews; Israel, History of; Judaism; Judaizers; Pharisees; Postexilic Period.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JEW<\/h3>\n<p>Judean, belonging to Judah. The short form of the English word was developed from the French. The underlying Hebrew word is used first in 2 Kings 16:6 as a national term, meaning citizens of Judah. It came into general use in the period of Jeremiah just before the exile (late sixth century <span>BC<\/span>; see Jer 32:12). It reflects a growing sense of national identity among foreign nations in an international world. In Jeremiah 34:9, a statement concerning the national principle that an individual citizen had the right to freedom from slavery uses the term “Jew.” In Jeremiah 52:28 it is poignantly used in giving the number of deported citizens.<\/p>\n<p>Once the people were in exile, the term’s national meaning was expanded with a religious one. The Jews were different from surrounding peoples in that they preserved a living religious tradition of one true God. A Jewish-Gentile polarization developed. Thus in Daniel 3:8-12 certain Jews are accused of deviating from otherwise acceptable Babylonian religious practices. The book of Esther is concerned with the problem of Jewish identity and survival in a hostile alien environment. Esther 8:17 speaks of Gentiles declaring themselves Jews in the religious sense of becoming proselytes.<\/p>\n<p>After the exile, the strongly religious meaning of “Jew” is expressed in the prophecy of Zechariah 8:23 that the Jew would be courted by Gentiles because God was with him. In Ezra 4:12 the term “Jews” is the national designation of the returned exiles, as it is in the book of Nehemiah (e.g., Neh 1:2; 4:2). In Nehemiah 13:24 there is a consciousness of the social exclusiveness of the Jews: on religious grounds, marriage to foreigners is deplored.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT “Jew” continues to have the same national and\/or religious meaning. Culturally, Jews have religious and other customs that NT documents addressed to Gentiles find it necessary to explain (Mk 7:3; Jn 5:1; 19:40). Jews are contrasted with Gentiles (Acts 11:19), Samaritans (Jn 4:9, 22), and proselytes (Acts 2:10). Jewish Christians can be called “Jews” (Gal 2:13), but there is an increasing stress on the religious distinctions between Jew and Christian. In Romans 2:17-29 Paul gives an interesting theological analysis of the term “Jew.” He is at pains to emphasize that the true meaning of the word lies not in outward religious profession but in an inward attitude to God. Paul was doubtless thinking of the inadequacy of his own life as a Jew before he was converted to the Christian faith (cf. Phil 3:3-6). His mention of “praise” in Romans 2:29 is the climax of the passage. It is a forceful play on words: in Hebrew, Judah means praise (Gn 29:35; cf. 49:8).<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul is here moving in the direction of regarding Christianity as the true heir of the faith of the OT. Revelation 2:9 and 3:9 express similar sentiments: to be truly a Jew is much more than a matter of birth and synagogue observance. Underlying these passages in both Revelation and Romans is obviously the issue of the messianic claims of Jesus (cf. Rom 9:3-5; 10:1-4). The NT bears sad testimony to the opposition of Jews to the Christian message. The gospel proved a cause of offense to the Jews (1 Cor 1:23). Paul himself, despite his claim of impeccable Jewish credentials (Acts 26:4-7), found himself the object of bitter Jewish attacks (21:11; 23:12, 27). Revelation 2:9 and 3:9 describe the Jews’ opposition as satanic: they were carrying out the work of God’s adversary, Satan.<\/p>\n<p>These negative overtones are especially attached to the use of the word “Jew” in John’s Gospel. It is found some 70 times, versus about five or six instances in each of the synoptic Gospels. Some passages, such as those already cited, have no associations of hostility. But in most cases the fourth Gospel uses “Jews” in the sense of the religious authorities, especially those in Jerusalem, who were hostile to Jesus (see, e.g., Jn 5:18; 9:18; 11:8; 18:36). It is noteworthy that in 9:22 the parents of the blind man, clearly Jews themselves, are said, literally, to fear the investigating Jews. In 18:14 “Jews” stands for the chief priests and Pharisees of 18:3. It must be emphasized that the author, who was obviously a Jew himself, was not expressing an anti-Semitic viewpoint as such. He condemned not race or people but those who opposed Jesus. He gladly acknowledged that some Jews put their faith in Jesus (8:31; 11:45: 12:11). Nathanael is featured as a type of the Christian Jew, a true Israelite “in whom is no guile” (1:47; cf. v 31; see Gn 27:35; 32:28).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Diaspora of the Jews; Israel, History of; Judaism; Judaizers; Pharisees; Postexilic Period.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JEW Judean, belonging to Judah. The short form of the English word was developed from the French. The underlying Hebrew word is used first in 2 Kings 16:6 as a national term, meaning citizens of Judah. It came into general use in the period of Jeremiah just before the exile (late sixth century BC; see Jer 32:12). It reflects a growing sense of national identity among foreign nations in an international world. In Jeremiah 34:9, a statement concerning the national principle that an individual c...","summary_en":"JEW Judean, belonging to Judah. The short form of the English word was developed from the French. The underlying Hebrew word is used first in 2 Kings 16:6 as a national term, meaning citizens of Judah. It came into general use in the period of Jeremiah just before the exile (late sixth century BC; see Jer 32:12). It reflects a growing sense of national identity among foreign nations in an international world. In Jeremiah 34:9, a statement concerning the national principle that an individual c...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":26931,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Significance of Names","title_en":"Significance of Names","content_ro":"<h3>NAMES, Significance of<\/h3>\n<p>In biblical times names were given in order to express something about a person, or to express something through him, and not simply to hang a convenient label around his neck. At least seven motivations appear in the choice of names:<\/p>\n<p>1. To record some aspect of a person’s birth. Moses was so called by his adoptive mother because he was drawn from the water, the sound of the name recalling a Hebrew verb “to draw out” (Ex 2:10). The circumstances surrounding their births gave Jacob (Gn 25:26) and also Samuel (1 Sm 1:20) their names. In Samuel’s case it is interesting to note that his name, meaning “heard by God,” records not the offering of prayer but the hearing and answering of it. Something of the deeper and more far-reaching implications of naming is seen in the fact that while the names Jacob and Samuel arise from birth circumstances, they also reveal in advance the person the child will become: Jacob the sneaky opportunist (cf. Gn 27:36), Samuel the man of prayer (1 Sm 7:5-9; 8:6, 21; 12:19-23).<\/p>\n<li>2. To express parental reactions to the birth. Isaac means “laughter” (cf. Gn 17:17; 18:12; 21:3-6). Nabal (1 Sm 25:25), which means “fool,” must have been the essence of a mother’s prayer—“Let him not be a fool”—though sadly he was! Abimelech (Jgs 8:31) means “My father is king” and may express a secret ambition of Gideon’s, at variance with his public testimony (Jgs 8:22-23).<\/li>\n<li>3. To secure the solidarity of the family. This may explain the proposal to call the baby Zechariah in Luke 1:59.<\/li>\n<li>4. To reveal the nature of the person, his function, or some other significant thing about him. The preeminent example of this is Jesus (Mt 1:21), named for his saving vocation. Isaiah seems to have seen his own name as significant of his message “the Lord saves” (see Is 8:18 <span>nlt<\/span> mg).<\/li>\n<li>5. To communicate God’s message. Isaiah (see Is 7:3) called his first son Shear-jashub (“a remnant shall return”) in order to embody the double-sided thrust of his message: as a result of faithlessness, the people will be reduced to a mere remnant (“only a remnant shall return”); as a result of God’s faithfulness, his people will be preserved in life (“a remnant shall indeed return”). He called his second boy Maher-shalal-hash-baz (8:3), (“speed-prey-haste-spoil”), indicating the certainty of the imminent onset of a victorious foe.<\/li>\n<li>6. To establish religious affiliation. All the names in the Bible with the endings <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">-iah<\/span> (alternatively <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">-jah<\/span>) or <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">-el<\/span> (e.g., Jeremiah, Nathanael) are in fact statements with “the Lord” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">-yah<\/span><em>)<\/em> or “God” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">-el<\/span><em>)<\/em> as subject. For example, Adonijah (2 Sm 3:4) means “the Lord is Sovereign”; Nathanael (Jn 1:47) means “God gave.” Such names were often chosen in times of religious decline in order to affirm the true faith of the parents.<\/li>\n<li>7. To affirm authority over another. In the ancient Near East, the naming of an object or person implied power and authority over what was named (Gn 2:19-20). Thus, a person not knowing another’s name could do neither harm nor good to that person (Ex 33:12, 17). In the ancient world a name described the person or his work in some way. When the individual or his situation changed, so did the name, as with Abram (Abraham) and Jacob (Israel). Pharaoh, as master of the patriarch Joseph, changed Joseph’s name when his status altered, calling him Zaphenath-paneah (Gn 41:45). When Eliakim was made king of Judah, the pharaoh changed the Jewish king’s name to Jehoiakim (2 Kgs 23:34). In captivity, Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah were forced to change their names to Belteshazzar, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego by order of the eunuch (Dn 1:6-7).<\/li>\n<p>In the NT, John the Baptist was named by an angel who represented God, and similarly Jesus was given his name by an angel. The naming of those children symbolized God’s authority over John the Baptist and his special relationship as Father to Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewNames\">New Names<\/p>\n<p>The ability of the name to reveal the nature or status of the person who bears it is well illustrated in the biblical practice of giving new names, as when Sarai became Sarah (Gn 17:15). Three motivations are possible:<\/p>\n<p>1. The new name replaces the old in order to signify the bestowal of powers not hitherto possessed. In this case the new name is equivalent to the experience of regeneration. The childless Abram becomes the “father of a multitude of nations,” Abraham (Gn 17:5).<\/p>\n<li>2. The new name may indicate a new character and status with God, as when Jacob the trickster became Israel the man of power with God (Gn 32:27; Hos 12:3-4); thus also, Simon became Peter (Jn 1:42).<\/li>\n<li>3. The new name may cement a new loyalty in the place of an old. Daniel the captive was given the name Belteshazzar, incorporating the name Bel, one of the gods of Babylon—presumably to turn him from the God of his fathers to that of his captors (Dn 1:7).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Names of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NAMES, Significance of<\/h3>\n<p>In biblical times names were given in order to express something about a person, or to express something through him, and not simply to hang a convenient label around his neck. At least seven motivations appear in the choice of names:<\/p>\n<p>1. To record some aspect of a person’s birth. Moses was so called by his adoptive mother because he was drawn from the water, the sound of the name recalling a Hebrew verb “to draw out” (Ex 2:10). The circumstances surrounding their births gave Jacob (Gn 25:26) and also Samuel (1 Sm 1:20) their names. In Samuel’s case it is interesting to note that his name, meaning “heard by God,” records not the offering of prayer but the hearing and answering of it. Something of the deeper and more far-reaching implications of naming is seen in the fact that while the names Jacob and Samuel arise from birth circumstances, they also reveal in advance the person the child will become: Jacob the sneaky opportunist (cf. Gn 27:36), Samuel the man of prayer (1 Sm 7:5-9; 8:6, 21; 12:19-23).<\/p>\n<li>2. To express parental reactions to the birth. Isaac means “laughter” (cf. Gn 17:17; 18:12; 21:3-6). Nabal (1 Sm 25:25), which means “fool,” must have been the essence of a mother’s prayer—“Let him not be a fool”—though sadly he was! Abimelech (Jgs 8:31) means “My father is king” and may express a secret ambition of Gideon’s, at variance with his public testimony (Jgs 8:22-23).<\/li>\n<li>3. To secure the solidarity of the family. This may explain the proposal to call the baby Zechariah in Luke 1:59.<\/li>\n<li>4. To reveal the nature of the person, his function, or some other significant thing about him. The preeminent example of this is Jesus (Mt 1:21), named for his saving vocation. Isaiah seems to have seen his own name as significant of his message “the Lord saves” (see Is 8:18 <span>nlt<\/span> mg).<\/li>\n<li>5. To communicate God’s message. Isaiah (see Is 7:3) called his first son Shear-jashub (“a remnant shall return”) in order to embody the double-sided thrust of his message: as a result of faithlessness, the people will be reduced to a mere remnant (“only a remnant shall return”); as a result of God’s faithfulness, his people will be preserved in life (“a remnant shall indeed return”). He called his second boy Maher-shalal-hash-baz (8:3), (“speed-prey-haste-spoil”), indicating the certainty of the imminent onset of a victorious foe.<\/li>\n<li>6. To establish religious affiliation. All the names in the Bible with the endings <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">-iah<\/span> (alternatively <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">-jah<\/span>) or <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">-el<\/span> (e.g., Jeremiah, Nathanael) are in fact statements with “the Lord” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">-yah<\/span><em>)<\/em> or “God” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">-el<\/span><em>)<\/em> as subject. For example, Adonijah (2 Sm 3:4) means “the Lord is Sovereign”; Nathanael (Jn 1:47) means “God gave.” Such names were often chosen in times of religious decline in order to affirm the true faith of the parents.<\/li>\n<li>7. To affirm authority over another. In the ancient Near East, the naming of an object or person implied power and authority over what was named (Gn 2:19-20). Thus, a person not knowing another’s name could do neither harm nor good to that person (Ex 33:12, 17). In the ancient world a name described the person or his work in some way. When the individual or his situation changed, so did the name, as with Abram (Abraham) and Jacob (Israel). Pharaoh, as master of the patriarch Joseph, changed Joseph’s name when his status altered, calling him Zaphenath-paneah (Gn 41:45). When Eliakim was made king of Judah, the pharaoh changed the Jewish king’s name to Jehoiakim (2 Kgs 23:34). In captivity, Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah were forced to change their names to Belteshazzar, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego by order of the eunuch (Dn 1:6-7).<\/li>\n<p>In the NT, John the Baptist was named by an angel who represented God, and similarly Jesus was given his name by an angel. The naming of those children symbolized God’s authority over John the Baptist and his special relationship as Father to Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewNames\">New Names<\/p>\n<p>The ability of the name to reveal the nature or status of the person who bears it is well illustrated in the biblical practice of giving new names, as when Sarai became Sarah (Gn 17:15). Three motivations are possible:<\/p>\n<p>1. The new name replaces the old in order to signify the bestowal of powers not hitherto possessed. In this case the new name is equivalent to the experience of regeneration. The childless Abram becomes the “father of a multitude of nations,” Abraham (Gn 17:5).<\/p>\n<li>2. The new name may indicate a new character and status with God, as when Jacob the trickster became Israel the man of power with God (Gn 32:27; Hos 12:3-4); thus also, Simon became Peter (Jn 1:42).<\/li>\n<li>3. The new name may cement a new loyalty in the place of an old. Daniel the captive was given the name Belteshazzar, incorporating the name Bel, one of the gods of Babylon—presumably to turn him from the God of his fathers to that of his captors (Dn 1:7).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Names of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"NAMES, Significance of In biblical times names were given in order to express something about a person, or to express something through him, and not simply to hang a convenient label around his neck. At least seven motivations appear in the choice of names: 1. To record some aspect of a person’s birth. Moses was so called by his adoptive mother because he was drawn from the water, the sound of the name recalling a Hebrew verb “to draw out” (Ex 2:10). The circumstances surrounding their births...","summary_en":"NAMES, Significance of In biblical times names were given in order to express something about a person, or to express something through him, and not simply to hang a convenient label around his neck. At least seven motivations appear in the choice of names: 1. To record some aspect of a person’s birth. Moses was so called by his adoptive mother because he was drawn from the water, the sound of the name recalling a Hebrew verb “to draw out” (Ex 2:10). The circumstances surrounding their births...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":27024,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Nathanael","title_en":"Nathanael","content_ro":"<h3>NATHANAEL<\/h3>\n<p>Jew from Cana of Galilee whom Jesus called to be a disciple (Jn 1:45-50; 21:2). Initially skeptical when Philip described Jesus as the fulfillment of the whole OT (1:45-46), Nathanael proclaimed Jesus to be the Son of God and the King of Israel (v 49) after an astonishing personal encounter.<\/p>\n<p>The fact that the only NT references to Nathanael occur in the Gospel of John has led some scholars to identify him with several personalities appearing in the synoptic Gospels. Because his call appears with those of Andrew, Peter, and Philip, some have speculated that he was one of the 12, possibly Bartholomew. Three pieces of evidence are cited in support of this position: (1) the name Bartholomew is patronymic (literally “son of Tolmai”) and would be accompanied by another name; (2) each of the Synoptic lists of the 12 apostles place Bartholomew after Philip (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16), paralleling the call of Nathanael after Philip in John’s account; and (3) Bartholomew’s name does not appear in the fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>A second position identifies Nathanael as James, the son of Alphaeus. According to this view, Jesus’ comment in John 1:47 should read “Behold, Israel [not “an Israelite”] indeed, in whom is no guile!” Israel is the name God gave to Jacob, and the NT form of Jacob is James. John addressed James, the son of Alphaeus, as Nathanael in order to distinguish him from others who had become prominent in the early church.<\/p>\n<p>Two less plausible identifications equate Nathanael with either Matthew or Simon the Cananaean. The first is precariously founded on the similar etymologies of the names Matthew (“gift of Yahweh”) and Nathanael (“Yahweh has given”). The second identifies the two on the basis of the common hometown of Cana.<\/p>\n<p>In the final analysis, Nathanael was most likely a disciple who was not a member of the 12 and was known only to John. This suggestion conforms to early patristic evidence. In the fourth Gospel, Nathanael serves as a symbol for the true Jew who overcomes initial skepticism to believe in Christ. This is confirmed by three observations: (1) his initial reaction to Jesus parallels that of others who believed in the Law and the Prophets (Jn 7:15, 27, 41; 9:41); (2) Jesus’ perception of Nathanael under a fig tree (1:48) identifies the latter’s devotion to the Torah (in rabbinic literature the proper place to study the Torah is under a fig tree); and (3) Jesus identifies Nathanael with Jacob, the father of the Israelite nation. In Genesis 25–32, Jacob is certainly sly and cunning in his dealings with Esau and Laban. John 1:51 strengthens the ties between Nathanael and Jacob by presenting the imagery of angels ascending and descending, reminiscent of Jacob’s dream, and by locating the event in Galilee close to Bethel and Jabbok, the sites of Jacob’s experiences. Nathanael is thus a symbol of the pious Israelite for whom Christ came. His response typifies what the fourth Evangelist understands as the appropriate response of the true Israelite to Jesus—from initial skepticism to faith (cf. Rom 9:6).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Apostle, Apostleship.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NATHANAEL<\/h3>\n<p>Jew from Cana of Galilee whom Jesus called to be a disciple (Jn 1:45-50; 21:2). Initially skeptical when Philip described Jesus as the fulfillment of the whole OT (1:45-46), Nathanael proclaimed Jesus to be the Son of God and the King of Israel (v 49) after an astonishing personal encounter.<\/p>\n<p>The fact that the only NT references to Nathanael occur in the Gospel of John has led some scholars to identify him with several personalities appearing in the synoptic Gospels. Because his call appears with those of Andrew, Peter, and Philip, some have speculated that he was one of the 12, possibly Bartholomew. Three pieces of evidence are cited in support of this position: (1) the name Bartholomew is patronymic (literally “son of Tolmai”) and would be accompanied by another name; (2) each of the Synoptic lists of the 12 apostles place Bartholomew after Philip (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16), paralleling the call of Nathanael after Philip in John’s account; and (3) Bartholomew’s name does not appear in the fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>A second position identifies Nathanael as James, the son of Alphaeus. According to this view, Jesus’ comment in John 1:47 should read “Behold, Israel [not “an Israelite”] indeed, in whom is no guile!” Israel is the name God gave to Jacob, and the NT form of Jacob is James. John addressed James, the son of Alphaeus, as Nathanael in order to distinguish him from others who had become prominent in the early church.<\/p>\n<p>Two less plausible identifications equate Nathanael with either Matthew or Simon the Cananaean. The first is precariously founded on the similar etymologies of the names Matthew (“gift of Yahweh”) and Nathanael (“Yahweh has given”). The second identifies the two on the basis of the common hometown of Cana.<\/p>\n<p>In the final analysis, Nathanael was most likely a disciple who was not a member of the 12 and was known only to John. This suggestion conforms to early patristic evidence. In the fourth Gospel, Nathanael serves as a symbol for the true Jew who overcomes initial skepticism to believe in Christ. This is confirmed by three observations: (1) his initial reaction to Jesus parallels that of others who believed in the Law and the Prophets (Jn 7:15, 27, 41; 9:41); (2) Jesus’ perception of Nathanael under a fig tree (1:48) identifies the latter’s devotion to the Torah (in rabbinic literature the proper place to study the Torah is under a fig tree); and (3) Jesus identifies Nathanael with Jacob, the father of the Israelite nation. In Genesis 25–32, Jacob is certainly sly and cunning in his dealings with Esau and Laban. John 1:51 strengthens the ties between Nathanael and Jacob by presenting the imagery of angels ascending and descending, reminiscent of Jacob’s dream, and by locating the event in Galilee close to Bethel and Jabbok, the sites of Jacob’s experiences. Nathanael is thus a symbol of the pious Israelite for whom Christ came. His response typifies what the fourth Evangelist understands as the appropriate response of the true Israelite to Jesus—from initial skepticism to faith (cf. Rom 9:6).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Apostle, Apostleship.<\/p>","summary_ro":"NATHANAEL Jew from Cana of Galilee whom Jesus called to be a disciple (Jn 1:45-50; 21:2). Initially skeptical when Philip described Jesus as the fulfillment of the whole OT (1:45-46), Nathanael proclaimed Jesus to be the Son of God and the King of Israel (v 49) after an astonishing personal encounter. The fact that the only NT references to Nathanael occur in the Gospel of John has led some scholars to identify him with several personalities appearing in the synoptic Gospels. Because his call...","summary_en":"NATHANAEL Jew from Cana of Galilee whom Jesus called to be a disciple (Jn 1:45-50; 21:2). Initially skeptical when Philip described Jesus as the fulfillment of the whole OT (1:45-46), Nathanael proclaimed Jesus to be the Son of God and the King of Israel (v 49) after an astonishing personal encounter. The fact that the only NT references to Nathanael occur in the Gospel of John has led some scholars to identify him with several personalities appearing in the synoptic Gospels. Because his call...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56336,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:47","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:47","content_ro":"<p><strong>1:47<\/strong> Jesus referred to Nathanael as <em>a man of complete integrity<\/em><em>,<\/em> contrasting him with Jacob, the scheming, deceitful patriarch whom God renamed <em>Israel<\/em> (see Gen 25:27-34; 27:1-36; 32:22-32). It is as though Nathanael embodied God’s ideal for Israel.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>1:47<\/strong> Jesus referred to Nathanael as <em>a man of complete integrity<\/em><em>,<\/em> contrasting him with Jacob, the scheming, deceitful patriarch whom God renamed <em>Israel<\/em> (see Gen 25:27-34; 27:1-36; 32:22-32). It is as though Nathanael embodied God’s ideal for Israel.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:47 Jesus referred to Nathanael as a man of complete integrity, contrasting him with Jacob, the scheming, deceitful patriarch whom God renamed Israel (see Gen 25:27-34; 27:1-36; 32:22-32). It is as though Nathanael embodied God’s ideal for Israel.","summary_en":"1:47 Jesus referred to Nathanael as a man of complete integrity, contrasting him with Jacob, the scheming, deceitful patriarch whom God renamed Israel (see Gen 25:27-34; 27:1-36; 32:22-32). It is as though Nathanael embodied God’s ideal for Israel.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83962,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:47","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:47","content_ro":"<p><strong>1:47<\/strong> Jesus referred to Nathanael as <em>a man of complete integrity<\/em><em>,<\/em> contrasting him with Jacob, the scheming, deceitful patriarch whom God renamed <em>Israel<\/em> (see Gen 25:27-34; 27:1-36; 32:22-32). It is as though Nathanael embodied God’s ideal for Israel.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>1:47<\/strong> Jesus referred to Nathanael as <em>a man of complete integrity<\/em><em>,<\/em> contrasting him with Jacob, the scheming, deceitful patriarch whom God renamed <em>Israel<\/em> (see Gen 25:27-34; 27:1-36; 32:22-32). It is as though Nathanael embodied God’s ideal for Israel.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:47 Jesus referred to Nathanael as a man of complete integrity, contrasting him with Jacob, the scheming, deceitful patriarch whom God renamed Israel (see Gen 25:27-34; 27:1-36; 32:22-32). It is as though Nathanael embodied God’s ideal for Israel.","summary_en":"1:47 Jesus referred to Nathanael as a man of complete integrity, contrasting him with Jacob, the scheming, deceitful patriarch whom God renamed Israel (see Gen 25:27-34; 27:1-36; 32:22-32). It is as though Nathanael embodied God’s ideal for Israel.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111588,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:47","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:47","content_ro":"<p><strong>1:47<\/strong> Jesus referred to Nathanael as <em>a man of complete integrity<\/em><em>,<\/em> contrasting him with Jacob, the scheming, deceitful patriarch whom God renamed <em>Israel<\/em> (see Gen 25:27-34; 27:1-36; 32:22-32). It is as though Nathanael embodied God’s ideal for Israel.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>1:47<\/strong> Jesus referred to Nathanael as <em>a man of complete integrity<\/em><em>,<\/em> contrasting him with Jacob, the scheming, deceitful patriarch whom God renamed <em>Israel<\/em> (see Gen 25:27-34; 27:1-36; 32:22-32). It is as though Nathanael embodied God’s ideal for Israel.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:47 Jesus referred to Nathanael as a man of complete integrity, contrasting him with Jacob, the scheming, deceitful patriarch whom God renamed Israel (see Gen 25:27-34; 27:1-36; 32:22-32). It is as though Nathanael embodied God’s ideal for Israel.","summary_en":"1:47 Jesus referred to Nathanael as a man of complete integrity, contrasting him with Jacob, the scheming, deceitful patriarch whom God renamed Israel (see Gen 25:27-34; 27:1-36; 32:22-32). It is as though Nathanael embodied God’s ideal for Israel.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139214,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:47","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:47","content_ro":"<p><strong>1:47<\/strong> Jesus referred to Nathanael as <em>a man of complete integrity<\/em><em>,<\/em> contrasting him with Jacob, the scheming, deceitful patriarch whom God renamed <em>Israel<\/em> (see Gen 25:27-34; 27:1-36; 32:22-32). It is as though Nathanael embodied God’s ideal for Israel.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>1:47<\/strong> Jesus referred to Nathanael as <em>a man of complete integrity<\/em><em>,<\/em> contrasting him with Jacob, the scheming, deceitful patriarch whom God renamed <em>Israel<\/em> (see Gen 25:27-34; 27:1-36; 32:22-32). It is as though Nathanael embodied God’s ideal for Israel.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:47 Jesus referred to Nathanael as a man of complete integrity, contrasting him with Jacob, the scheming, deceitful patriarch whom God renamed Israel (see Gen 25:27-34; 27:1-36; 32:22-32). It is as though Nathanael embodied God’s ideal for Israel.","summary_en":"1:47 Jesus referred to Nathanael as a man of complete integrity, contrasting him with Jacob, the scheming, deceitful patriarch whom God renamed Israel (see Gen 25:27-34; 27:1-36; 32:22-32). It is as though Nathanael embodied God’s ideal for Israel.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"48":[{"id":27027,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Nathanael","title_en":"Nathanael","content_ro":"<h3>NATHANAEL<\/h3>\n<p>Jew from Cana of Galilee whom Jesus called to be a disciple (Jn 1:45-50; 21:2). Initially skeptical when Philip described Jesus as the fulfillment of the whole OT (1:45-46), Nathanael proclaimed Jesus to be the Son of God and the King of Israel (v 49) after an astonishing personal encounter.<\/p>\n<p>The fact that the only NT references to Nathanael occur in the Gospel of John has led some scholars to identify him with several personalities appearing in the synoptic Gospels. Because his call appears with those of Andrew, Peter, and Philip, some have speculated that he was one of the 12, possibly Bartholomew. Three pieces of evidence are cited in support of this position: (1) the name Bartholomew is patronymic (literally “son of Tolmai”) and would be accompanied by another name; (2) each of the Synoptic lists of the 12 apostles place Bartholomew after Philip (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16), paralleling the call of Nathanael after Philip in John’s account; and (3) Bartholomew’s name does not appear in the fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>A second position identifies Nathanael as James, the son of Alphaeus. According to this view, Jesus’ comment in John 1:47 should read “Behold, Israel [not “an Israelite”] indeed, in whom is no guile!” Israel is the name God gave to Jacob, and the NT form of Jacob is James. John addressed James, the son of Alphaeus, as Nathanael in order to distinguish him from others who had become prominent in the early church.<\/p>\n<p>Two less plausible identifications equate Nathanael with either Matthew or Simon the Cananaean. The first is precariously founded on the similar etymologies of the names Matthew (“gift of Yahweh”) and Nathanael (“Yahweh has given”). The second identifies the two on the basis of the common hometown of Cana.<\/p>\n<p>In the final analysis, Nathanael was most likely a disciple who was not a member of the 12 and was known only to John. This suggestion conforms to early patristic evidence. In the fourth Gospel, Nathanael serves as a symbol for the true Jew who overcomes initial skepticism to believe in Christ. This is confirmed by three observations: (1) his initial reaction to Jesus parallels that of others who believed in the Law and the Prophets (Jn 7:15, 27, 41; 9:41); (2) Jesus’ perception of Nathanael under a fig tree (1:48) identifies the latter’s devotion to the Torah (in rabbinic literature the proper place to study the Torah is under a fig tree); and (3) Jesus identifies Nathanael with Jacob, the father of the Israelite nation. In Genesis 25–32, Jacob is certainly sly and cunning in his dealings with Esau and Laban. John 1:51 strengthens the ties between Nathanael and Jacob by presenting the imagery of angels ascending and descending, reminiscent of Jacob’s dream, and by locating the event in Galilee close to Bethel and Jabbok, the sites of Jacob’s experiences. Nathanael is thus a symbol of the pious Israelite for whom Christ came. His response typifies what the fourth Evangelist understands as the appropriate response of the true Israelite to Jesus—from initial skepticism to faith (cf. Rom 9:6).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Apostle, Apostleship.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NATHANAEL<\/h3>\n<p>Jew from Cana of Galilee whom Jesus called to be a disciple (Jn 1:45-50; 21:2). Initially skeptical when Philip described Jesus as the fulfillment of the whole OT (1:45-46), Nathanael proclaimed Jesus to be the Son of God and the King of Israel (v 49) after an astonishing personal encounter.<\/p>\n<p>The fact that the only NT references to Nathanael occur in the Gospel of John has led some scholars to identify him with several personalities appearing in the synoptic Gospels. Because his call appears with those of Andrew, Peter, and Philip, some have speculated that he was one of the 12, possibly Bartholomew. Three pieces of evidence are cited in support of this position: (1) the name Bartholomew is patronymic (literally “son of Tolmai”) and would be accompanied by another name; (2) each of the Synoptic lists of the 12 apostles place Bartholomew after Philip (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16), paralleling the call of Nathanael after Philip in John’s account; and (3) Bartholomew’s name does not appear in the fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>A second position identifies Nathanael as James, the son of Alphaeus. According to this view, Jesus’ comment in John 1:47 should read “Behold, Israel [not “an Israelite”] indeed, in whom is no guile!” Israel is the name God gave to Jacob, and the NT form of Jacob is James. John addressed James, the son of Alphaeus, as Nathanael in order to distinguish him from others who had become prominent in the early church.<\/p>\n<p>Two less plausible identifications equate Nathanael with either Matthew or Simon the Cananaean. The first is precariously founded on the similar etymologies of the names Matthew (“gift of Yahweh”) and Nathanael (“Yahweh has given”). The second identifies the two on the basis of the common hometown of Cana.<\/p>\n<p>In the final analysis, Nathanael was most likely a disciple who was not a member of the 12 and was known only to John. This suggestion conforms to early patristic evidence. In the fourth Gospel, Nathanael serves as a symbol for the true Jew who overcomes initial skepticism to believe in Christ. This is confirmed by three observations: (1) his initial reaction to Jesus parallels that of others who believed in the Law and the Prophets (Jn 7:15, 27, 41; 9:41); (2) Jesus’ perception of Nathanael under a fig tree (1:48) identifies the latter’s devotion to the Torah (in rabbinic literature the proper place to study the Torah is under a fig tree); and (3) Jesus identifies Nathanael with Jacob, the father of the Israelite nation. In Genesis 25–32, Jacob is certainly sly and cunning in his dealings with Esau and Laban. John 1:51 strengthens the ties between Nathanael and Jacob by presenting the imagery of angels ascending and descending, reminiscent of Jacob’s dream, and by locating the event in Galilee close to Bethel and Jabbok, the sites of Jacob’s experiences. Nathanael is thus a symbol of the pious Israelite for whom Christ came. His response typifies what the fourth Evangelist understands as the appropriate response of the true Israelite to Jesus—from initial skepticism to faith (cf. Rom 9:6).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Apostle, Apostleship.<\/p>","summary_ro":"NATHANAEL Jew from Cana of Galilee whom Jesus called to be a disciple (Jn 1:45-50; 21:2). Initially skeptical when Philip described Jesus as the fulfillment of the whole OT (1:45-46), Nathanael proclaimed Jesus to be the Son of God and the King of Israel (v 49) after an astonishing personal encounter. The fact that the only NT references to Nathanael occur in the Gospel of John has led some scholars to identify him with several personalities appearing in the synoptic Gospels. Because his call...","summary_en":"NATHANAEL Jew from Cana of Galilee whom Jesus called to be a disciple (Jn 1:45-50; 21:2). Initially skeptical when Philip described Jesus as the fulfillment of the whole OT (1:45-46), Nathanael proclaimed Jesus to be the Son of God and the King of Israel (v 49) after an astonishing personal encounter. The fact that the only NT references to Nathanael occur in the Gospel of John has led some scholars to identify him with several personalities appearing in the synoptic Gospels. Because his call...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56337,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:48","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:48","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:48-49<\/strong> Jesus captured Nathanael’s attention by knowing his character (1:47), then he captured his worship by supernaturally knowing his previous actions. Nathanael witnessed a miracle and took a remarkable step of faith.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:48-49<\/strong> Jesus captured Nathanael’s attention by knowing his character (1:47), then he captured his worship by supernaturally knowing his previous actions. Nathanael witnessed a miracle and took a remarkable step of faith.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:48-49 Jesus captured Nathanael’s attention by knowing his character (1:47), then he captured his worship by supernaturally knowing his previous actions. Nathanael witnessed a miracle and took a remarkable step of faith.","summary_en":"1:48-49 Jesus captured Nathanael’s attention by knowing his character (1:47), then he captured his worship by supernaturally knowing his previous actions. Nathanael witnessed a miracle and took a remarkable step of faith.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83963,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:48","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:48","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:48-49<\/strong> Jesus captured Nathanael’s attention by knowing his character (1:47), then he captured his worship by supernaturally knowing his previous actions. Nathanael witnessed a miracle and took a remarkable step of faith.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:48-49<\/strong> Jesus captured Nathanael’s attention by knowing his character (1:47), then he captured his worship by supernaturally knowing his previous actions. Nathanael witnessed a miracle and took a remarkable step of faith.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:48-49 Jesus captured Nathanael’s attention by knowing his character (1:47), then he captured his worship by supernaturally knowing his previous actions. Nathanael witnessed a miracle and took a remarkable step of faith.","summary_en":"1:48-49 Jesus captured Nathanael’s attention by knowing his character (1:47), then he captured his worship by supernaturally knowing his previous actions. Nathanael witnessed a miracle and took a remarkable step of faith.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111589,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:48","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:48","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:48-49<\/strong> Jesus captured Nathanael’s attention by knowing his character (1:47), then he captured his worship by supernaturally knowing his previous actions. Nathanael witnessed a miracle and took a remarkable step of faith.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:48-49<\/strong> Jesus captured Nathanael’s attention by knowing his character (1:47), then he captured his worship by supernaturally knowing his previous actions. Nathanael witnessed a miracle and took a remarkable step of faith.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:48-49 Jesus captured Nathanael’s attention by knowing his character (1:47), then he captured his worship by supernaturally knowing his previous actions. Nathanael witnessed a miracle and took a remarkable step of faith.","summary_en":"1:48-49 Jesus captured Nathanael’s attention by knowing his character (1:47), then he captured his worship by supernaturally knowing his previous actions. Nathanael witnessed a miracle and took a remarkable step of faith.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139215,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:48","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:48","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:48-49<\/strong> Jesus captured Nathanael’s attention by knowing his character (1:47), then he captured his worship by supernaturally knowing his previous actions. Nathanael witnessed a miracle and took a remarkable step of faith.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -5\"><strong>1:48-49<\/strong> Jesus captured Nathanael’s attention by knowing his character (1:47), then he captured his worship by supernaturally knowing his previous actions. Nathanael witnessed a miracle and took a remarkable step of faith.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:48-49 Jesus captured Nathanael’s attention by knowing his character (1:47), then he captured his worship by supernaturally knowing his previous actions. Nathanael witnessed a miracle and took a remarkable step of faith.","summary_en":"1:48-49 Jesus captured Nathanael’s attention by knowing his character (1:47), then he captured his worship by supernaturally knowing his previous actions. Nathanael witnessed a miracle and took a remarkable step of faith.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"49":[{"id":19440,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jesus Christ","title_en":"Jesus Christ","content_ro":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","summary_en":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":27020,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Nathanael","title_en":"Nathanael","content_ro":"<h3>NATHANAEL<\/h3>\n<p>Jew from Cana of Galilee whom Jesus called to be a disciple (Jn 1:45-50; 21:2). Initially skeptical when Philip described Jesus as the fulfillment of the whole OT (1:45-46), Nathanael proclaimed Jesus to be the Son of God and the King of Israel (v 49) after an astonishing personal encounter.<\/p>\n<p>The fact that the only NT references to Nathanael occur in the Gospel of John has led some scholars to identify him with several personalities appearing in the synoptic Gospels. Because his call appears with those of Andrew, Peter, and Philip, some have speculated that he was one of the 12, possibly Bartholomew. Three pieces of evidence are cited in support of this position: (1) the name Bartholomew is patronymic (literally “son of Tolmai”) and would be accompanied by another name; (2) each of the Synoptic lists of the 12 apostles place Bartholomew after Philip (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16), paralleling the call of Nathanael after Philip in John’s account; and (3) Bartholomew’s name does not appear in the fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>A second position identifies Nathanael as James, the son of Alphaeus. According to this view, Jesus’ comment in John 1:47 should read “Behold, Israel [not “an Israelite”] indeed, in whom is no guile!” Israel is the name God gave to Jacob, and the NT form of Jacob is James. John addressed James, the son of Alphaeus, as Nathanael in order to distinguish him from others who had become prominent in the early church.<\/p>\n<p>Two less plausible identifications equate Nathanael with either Matthew or Simon the Cananaean. The first is precariously founded on the similar etymologies of the names Matthew (“gift of Yahweh”) and Nathanael (“Yahweh has given”). The second identifies the two on the basis of the common hometown of Cana.<\/p>\n<p>In the final analysis, Nathanael was most likely a disciple who was not a member of the 12 and was known only to John. This suggestion conforms to early patristic evidence. In the fourth Gospel, Nathanael serves as a symbol for the true Jew who overcomes initial skepticism to believe in Christ. This is confirmed by three observations: (1) his initial reaction to Jesus parallels that of others who believed in the Law and the Prophets (Jn 7:15, 27, 41; 9:41); (2) Jesus’ perception of Nathanael under a fig tree (1:48) identifies the latter’s devotion to the Torah (in rabbinic literature the proper place to study the Torah is under a fig tree); and (3) Jesus identifies Nathanael with Jacob, the father of the Israelite nation. In Genesis 25–32, Jacob is certainly sly and cunning in his dealings with Esau and Laban. John 1:51 strengthens the ties between Nathanael and Jacob by presenting the imagery of angels ascending and descending, reminiscent of Jacob’s dream, and by locating the event in Galilee close to Bethel and Jabbok, the sites of Jacob’s experiences. Nathanael is thus a symbol of the pious Israelite for whom Christ came. His response typifies what the fourth Evangelist understands as the appropriate response of the true Israelite to Jesus—from initial skepticism to faith (cf. Rom 9:6).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Apostle, Apostleship.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NATHANAEL<\/h3>\n<p>Jew from Cana of Galilee whom Jesus called to be a disciple (Jn 1:45-50; 21:2). Initially skeptical when Philip described Jesus as the fulfillment of the whole OT (1:45-46), Nathanael proclaimed Jesus to be the Son of God and the King of Israel (v 49) after an astonishing personal encounter.<\/p>\n<p>The fact that the only NT references to Nathanael occur in the Gospel of John has led some scholars to identify him with several personalities appearing in the synoptic Gospels. Because his call appears with those of Andrew, Peter, and Philip, some have speculated that he was one of the 12, possibly Bartholomew. Three pieces of evidence are cited in support of this position: (1) the name Bartholomew is patronymic (literally “son of Tolmai”) and would be accompanied by another name; (2) each of the Synoptic lists of the 12 apostles place Bartholomew after Philip (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16), paralleling the call of Nathanael after Philip in John’s account; and (3) Bartholomew’s name does not appear in the fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>A second position identifies Nathanael as James, the son of Alphaeus. According to this view, Jesus’ comment in John 1:47 should read “Behold, Israel [not “an Israelite”] indeed, in whom is no guile!” Israel is the name God gave to Jacob, and the NT form of Jacob is James. John addressed James, the son of Alphaeus, as Nathanael in order to distinguish him from others who had become prominent in the early church.<\/p>\n<p>Two less plausible identifications equate Nathanael with either Matthew or Simon the Cananaean. The first is precariously founded on the similar etymologies of the names Matthew (“gift of Yahweh”) and Nathanael (“Yahweh has given”). The second identifies the two on the basis of the common hometown of Cana.<\/p>\n<p>In the final analysis, Nathanael was most likely a disciple who was not a member of the 12 and was known only to John. This suggestion conforms to early patristic evidence. In the fourth Gospel, Nathanael serves as a symbol for the true Jew who overcomes initial skepticism to believe in Christ. This is confirmed by three observations: (1) his initial reaction to Jesus parallels that of others who believed in the Law and the Prophets (Jn 7:15, 27, 41; 9:41); (2) Jesus’ perception of Nathanael under a fig tree (1:48) identifies the latter’s devotion to the Torah (in rabbinic literature the proper place to study the Torah is under a fig tree); and (3) Jesus identifies Nathanael with Jacob, the father of the Israelite nation. In Genesis 25–32, Jacob is certainly sly and cunning in his dealings with Esau and Laban. John 1:51 strengthens the ties between Nathanael and Jacob by presenting the imagery of angels ascending and descending, reminiscent of Jacob’s dream, and by locating the event in Galilee close to Bethel and Jabbok, the sites of Jacob’s experiences. Nathanael is thus a symbol of the pious Israelite for whom Christ came. His response typifies what the fourth Evangelist understands as the appropriate response of the true Israelite to Jesus—from initial skepticism to faith (cf. Rom 9:6).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Apostle, Apostleship.<\/p>","summary_ro":"NATHANAEL Jew from Cana of Galilee whom Jesus called to be a disciple (Jn 1:45-50; 21:2). Initially skeptical when Philip described Jesus as the fulfillment of the whole OT (1:45-46), Nathanael proclaimed Jesus to be the Son of God and the King of Israel (v 49) after an astonishing personal encounter. The fact that the only NT references to Nathanael occur in the Gospel of John has led some scholars to identify him with several personalities appearing in the synoptic Gospels. Because his call...","summary_en":"NATHANAEL Jew from Cana of Galilee whom Jesus called to be a disciple (Jn 1:45-50; 21:2). Initially skeptical when Philip described Jesus as the fulfillment of the whole OT (1:45-46), Nathanael proclaimed Jesus to be the Son of God and the King of Israel (v 49) after an astonishing personal encounter. The fact that the only NT references to Nathanael occur in the Gospel of John has led some scholars to identify him with several personalities appearing in the synoptic Gospels. Because his call...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":32269,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Rabbi","title_en":"Rabbi","content_ro":"<h3>RABBI<\/h3>\n<p>Title of respect, meaning “my great one” or “my superior one,” used in Jesus’ day for Jewish religious teachers.<\/p>\n<p>According to Matthew 23:7, “rabbi” was evidently used as a common title of address for the Jewish scribes and Pharisees. However, in the NT it is most commonly used as a title of respectful address when others were speaking to Jesus. It was used by Nathanael (Jn 1:49), by Peter and Andrew (v 38), by Nicodemus (3:2), by the disciples as a group (9:2; 11:8), and by a crowd generally (6:25). Mary Magdalene (Mk 10:51) and blind Bartimaeus (Jn 20:16) both use the longer form, “rabboni,” to address Jesus directly, thus indicating even more profound respect than the use of the shorter title “rabbi.” By the time of the writing of John’s Gospel, the title “rabbi” meant “teacher”; John explicitly states this in 1:38 and implicitly says this in 3:2.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus condemns the scribes and the Pharisees for their evident pride displayed in their love of being greeted in the marketplaces and their insistence on having people call them “rabbi” (Mt 23:7-8). Jesus prohibited the use of the title for his own disciples, saying, “You are not to be called rabbi.” However, Jesus’ prohibition was more against seeking to be called this and insisting on it than the legitimate possession of the title itself. In fact, when people did use the title of Jesus in a reverent way, they were not in any way rebuked.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>RABBI<\/h3>\n<p>Title of respect, meaning “my great one” or “my superior one,” used in Jesus’ day for Jewish religious teachers.<\/p>\n<p>According to Matthew 23:7, “rabbi” was evidently used as a common title of address for the Jewish scribes and Pharisees. However, in the NT it is most commonly used as a title of respectful address when others were speaking to Jesus. It was used by Nathanael (Jn 1:49), by Peter and Andrew (v 38), by Nicodemus (3:2), by the disciples as a group (9:2; 11:8), and by a crowd generally (6:25). Mary Magdalene (Mk 10:51) and blind Bartimaeus (Jn 20:16) both use the longer form, “rabboni,” to address Jesus directly, thus indicating even more profound respect than the use of the shorter title “rabbi.” By the time of the writing of John’s Gospel, the title “rabbi” meant “teacher”; John explicitly states this in 1:38 and implicitly says this in 3:2.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus condemns the scribes and the Pharisees for their evident pride displayed in their love of being greeted in the marketplaces and their insistence on having people call them “rabbi” (Mt 23:7-8). Jesus prohibited the use of the title for his own disciples, saying, “You are not to be called rabbi.” However, Jesus’ prohibition was more against seeking to be called this and insisting on it than the legitimate possession of the title itself. In fact, when people did use the title of Jesus in a reverent way, they were not in any way rebuked.<\/p>","summary_ro":"RABBI Title of respect, meaning “my great one” or “my superior one,” used in Jesus’ day for Jewish religious teachers. According to Matthew 23:7, “rabbi” was evidently used as a common title of address for the Jewish scribes and Pharisees. However, in the NT it is most commonly used as a title of respectful address when others were speaking to Jesus. It was used by Nathanael (Jn 1:49), by Peter and Andrew (v 38), by Nicodemus (3:2), by the disciples as a group (9:2; 11:8), and by a crowd gene...","summary_en":"RABBI Title of respect, meaning “my great one” or “my superior one,” used in Jesus’ day for Jewish religious teachers. According to Matthew 23:7, “rabbi” was evidently used as a common title of address for the Jewish scribes and Pharisees. However, in the NT it is most commonly used as a title of respectful address when others were speaking to Jesus. It was used by Nathanael (Jn 1:49), by Peter and Andrew (v 38), by Nicodemus (3:2), by the disciples as a group (9:2; 11:8), and by a crowd gene...","source":"Articles\/R.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65942,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","title_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","content_ro":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","summary_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93568,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","title_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","content_ro":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","summary_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121194,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","title_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","content_ro":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","summary_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148820,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","title_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","content_ro":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","summary_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"50":[{"id":18283,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Ladder*, Jacob’s","title_en":"Ladder*, Jacob’s","content_ro":"<h3>JACOB’S LADDER*<\/h3>\n<p>When Jacob left home after deceiving his father, Isaac, into giving him the blessing that Isaac had intended for Esau (Gn 27:6-40), he was not only desirous of finding a wife from among the daughters of his mother’s brother, but he was also literally fleeing for his life, because Esau had determined to kill him (v 41). When he stopped to rest for the night in the open countryside, the Lord appeared to him in a dream and blessed him (28:10-22). In the vision Jacob saw a ladder reaching from the earth to heaven with angels ascending and descending upon it. At the top of the ladder stood the Lord himself, who confirmed to Jacob the promise previously given to Abraham (12:2-3, 7), and repeated to Isaac (26:3-5). In the context it seems clear that the ladder with the ascending and descending angels depicts God reaching out to Jacob and making a way for Jacob to have a relationship with him. The communion that was to exist between God and Jacob is symbolized in the ladder and the movement of the angels. This communication between heaven and earth appears to be the same point that is made in John 1:50 when Jesus says to Nathanael and his other disciples, “You will all see heaven open and the angels of God going up and down upon the Son of Man” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Jacob was so overwhelmed by God’s grace in revealing himself to him in this way that he named the place at which this took place Bethel—the House of God.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JACOB’S LADDER*<\/h3>\n<p>When Jacob left home after deceiving his father, Isaac, into giving him the blessing that Isaac had intended for Esau (Gn 27:6-40), he was not only desirous of finding a wife from among the daughters of his mother’s brother, but he was also literally fleeing for his life, because Esau had determined to kill him (v 41). When he stopped to rest for the night in the open countryside, the Lord appeared to him in a dream and blessed him (28:10-22). In the vision Jacob saw a ladder reaching from the earth to heaven with angels ascending and descending upon it. At the top of the ladder stood the Lord himself, who confirmed to Jacob the promise previously given to Abraham (12:2-3, 7), and repeated to Isaac (26:3-5). In the context it seems clear that the ladder with the ascending and descending angels depicts God reaching out to Jacob and making a way for Jacob to have a relationship with him. The communion that was to exist between God and Jacob is symbolized in the ladder and the movement of the angels. This communication between heaven and earth appears to be the same point that is made in John 1:50 when Jesus says to Nathanael and his other disciples, “You will all see heaven open and the angels of God going up and down upon the Son of Man” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Jacob was so overwhelmed by God’s grace in revealing himself to him in this way that he named the place at which this took place Bethel—the House of God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JACOB’S LADDER* When Jacob left home after deceiving his father, Isaac, into giving him the blessing that Isaac had intended for Esau (Gn 27:6-40), he was not only desirous of finding a wife from among the daughters of his mother’s brother, but he was also literally fleeing for his life, because Esau had determined to kill him (v 41). When he stopped to rest for the night in the open countryside, the Lord appeared to him in a dream and blessed him (28:10-22). In the vision Jacob saw a ladder ...","summary_en":"JACOB’S LADDER* When Jacob left home after deceiving his father, Isaac, into giving him the blessing that Isaac had intended for Esau (Gn 27:6-40), he was not only desirous of finding a wife from among the daughters of his mother’s brother, but he was also literally fleeing for his life, because Esau had determined to kill him (v 41). When he stopped to rest for the night in the open countryside, the Lord appeared to him in a dream and blessed him (28:10-22). In the vision Jacob saw a ladder ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"51":[{"id":27029,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Nathanael","title_en":"Nathanael","content_ro":"<h3>NATHANAEL<\/h3>\n<p>Jew from Cana of Galilee whom Jesus called to be a disciple (Jn 1:45-50; 21:2). Initially skeptical when Philip described Jesus as the fulfillment of the whole OT (1:45-46), Nathanael proclaimed Jesus to be the Son of God and the King of Israel (v 49) after an astonishing personal encounter.<\/p>\n<p>The fact that the only NT references to Nathanael occur in the Gospel of John has led some scholars to identify him with several personalities appearing in the synoptic Gospels. Because his call appears with those of Andrew, Peter, and Philip, some have speculated that he was one of the 12, possibly Bartholomew. Three pieces of evidence are cited in support of this position: (1) the name Bartholomew is patronymic (literally “son of Tolmai”) and would be accompanied by another name; (2) each of the Synoptic lists of the 12 apostles place Bartholomew after Philip (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16), paralleling the call of Nathanael after Philip in John’s account; and (3) Bartholomew’s name does not appear in the fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>A second position identifies Nathanael as James, the son of Alphaeus. According to this view, Jesus’ comment in John 1:47 should read “Behold, Israel [not “an Israelite”] indeed, in whom is no guile!” Israel is the name God gave to Jacob, and the NT form of Jacob is James. John addressed James, the son of Alphaeus, as Nathanael in order to distinguish him from others who had become prominent in the early church.<\/p>\n<p>Two less plausible identifications equate Nathanael with either Matthew or Simon the Cananaean. The first is precariously founded on the similar etymologies of the names Matthew (“gift of Yahweh”) and Nathanael (“Yahweh has given”). The second identifies the two on the basis of the common hometown of Cana.<\/p>\n<p>In the final analysis, Nathanael was most likely a disciple who was not a member of the 12 and was known only to John. This suggestion conforms to early patristic evidence. In the fourth Gospel, Nathanael serves as a symbol for the true Jew who overcomes initial skepticism to believe in Christ. This is confirmed by three observations: (1) his initial reaction to Jesus parallels that of others who believed in the Law and the Prophets (Jn 7:15, 27, 41; 9:41); (2) Jesus’ perception of Nathanael under a fig tree (1:48) identifies the latter’s devotion to the Torah (in rabbinic literature the proper place to study the Torah is under a fig tree); and (3) Jesus identifies Nathanael with Jacob, the father of the Israelite nation. In Genesis 25–32, Jacob is certainly sly and cunning in his dealings with Esau and Laban. John 1:51 strengthens the ties between Nathanael and Jacob by presenting the imagery of angels ascending and descending, reminiscent of Jacob’s dream, and by locating the event in Galilee close to Bethel and Jabbok, the sites of Jacob’s experiences. Nathanael is thus a symbol of the pious Israelite for whom Christ came. His response typifies what the fourth Evangelist understands as the appropriate response of the true Israelite to Jesus—from initial skepticism to faith (cf. Rom 9:6).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Apostle, Apostleship.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NATHANAEL<\/h3>\n<p>Jew from Cana of Galilee whom Jesus called to be a disciple (Jn 1:45-50; 21:2). Initially skeptical when Philip described Jesus as the fulfillment of the whole OT (1:45-46), Nathanael proclaimed Jesus to be the Son of God and the King of Israel (v 49) after an astonishing personal encounter.<\/p>\n<p>The fact that the only NT references to Nathanael occur in the Gospel of John has led some scholars to identify him with several personalities appearing in the synoptic Gospels. Because his call appears with those of Andrew, Peter, and Philip, some have speculated that he was one of the 12, possibly Bartholomew. Three pieces of evidence are cited in support of this position: (1) the name Bartholomew is patronymic (literally “son of Tolmai”) and would be accompanied by another name; (2) each of the Synoptic lists of the 12 apostles place Bartholomew after Philip (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16), paralleling the call of Nathanael after Philip in John’s account; and (3) Bartholomew’s name does not appear in the fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>A second position identifies Nathanael as James, the son of Alphaeus. According to this view, Jesus’ comment in John 1:47 should read “Behold, Israel [not “an Israelite”] indeed, in whom is no guile!” Israel is the name God gave to Jacob, and the NT form of Jacob is James. John addressed James, the son of Alphaeus, as Nathanael in order to distinguish him from others who had become prominent in the early church.<\/p>\n<p>Two less plausible identifications equate Nathanael with either Matthew or Simon the Cananaean. The first is precariously founded on the similar etymologies of the names Matthew (“gift of Yahweh”) and Nathanael (“Yahweh has given”). The second identifies the two on the basis of the common hometown of Cana.<\/p>\n<p>In the final analysis, Nathanael was most likely a disciple who was not a member of the 12 and was known only to John. This suggestion conforms to early patristic evidence. In the fourth Gospel, Nathanael serves as a symbol for the true Jew who overcomes initial skepticism to believe in Christ. This is confirmed by three observations: (1) his initial reaction to Jesus parallels that of others who believed in the Law and the Prophets (Jn 7:15, 27, 41; 9:41); (2) Jesus’ perception of Nathanael under a fig tree (1:48) identifies the latter’s devotion to the Torah (in rabbinic literature the proper place to study the Torah is under a fig tree); and (3) Jesus identifies Nathanael with Jacob, the father of the Israelite nation. In Genesis 25–32, Jacob is certainly sly and cunning in his dealings with Esau and Laban. John 1:51 strengthens the ties between Nathanael and Jacob by presenting the imagery of angels ascending and descending, reminiscent of Jacob’s dream, and by locating the event in Galilee close to Bethel and Jabbok, the sites of Jacob’s experiences. Nathanael is thus a symbol of the pious Israelite for whom Christ came. His response typifies what the fourth Evangelist understands as the appropriate response of the true Israelite to Jesus—from initial skepticism to faith (cf. Rom 9:6).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Apostle, Apostleship.<\/p>","summary_ro":"NATHANAEL Jew from Cana of Galilee whom Jesus called to be a disciple (Jn 1:45-50; 21:2). Initially skeptical when Philip described Jesus as the fulfillment of the whole OT (1:45-46), Nathanael proclaimed Jesus to be the Son of God and the King of Israel (v 49) after an astonishing personal encounter. The fact that the only NT references to Nathanael occur in the Gospel of John has led some scholars to identify him with several personalities appearing in the synoptic Gospels. Because his call...","summary_en":"NATHANAEL Jew from Cana of Galilee whom Jesus called to be a disciple (Jn 1:45-50; 21:2). Initially skeptical when Philip described Jesus as the fulfillment of the whole OT (1:45-46), Nathanael proclaimed Jesus to be the Son of God and the King of Israel (v 49) after an astonishing personal encounter. The fact that the only NT references to Nathanael occur in the Gospel of John has led some scholars to identify him with several personalities appearing in the synoptic Gospels. Because his call...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":35887,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Son of Man","title_en":"Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>SON OF MAN<\/h3>\n<p>Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory.<\/p>\n<p>The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. The book of Ezekiel is the general source, since this prophet was referred to as “son of man” 90 times. For example, God addressed him, “Son of man, stand upon your feet, and I will speak with you” (Ez 2:1, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus’ use of the term “Son of Man” and numerous themes from Ezekiel suggest his desire to identify himself as the eschatological prophet who, like Ezekiel (chs 4, 7, 10, 22, 40–48), had the last word about the destruction of Jerusalem and the restoration of the kingdom of God to Israel (Mt 23–24; Acts 1:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>The specific source of the term is Daniel 7:13-14, with its vision of one “like a son of man” who “comes with the clouds” into the presence of “the Ancient of Days,” who gives him the universal and eternal kingdom of God. Jesus repeatedly quoted parts of this text in teaching about his second coming (Mt 16:27; 19:28; 24:30; 25:31; 26:64). Clearly, Jesus understood this passage as a prophetic portrayal of his own person: his incarnation, ascension, and inheritance of the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the term “Son of Man” is used by Jesus about 80 times as a mysterious, indirect way of speaking about himself (Mt, 32 times; Mk, 14 times; Lk, 26 times; Jn, 10 times). In all these texts, Jesus was always the speaker, and no one ever addressed him as “Son of Man.” In some texts the reference is cryptic enough for some interpreters to insist that Jesus was speaking about another person. Such uncertainty is recorded in only one text in John, where the crowd asks Jesus, “Who is this ‘Son of Man’?” (Jn 12:34). In most texts, the identification is clear. In some it is explicit: “Who do men say that the Son of Man is?”—followed by, “Who do you say that I am?” (Mt 16:13, 15). The conclusion generally drawn is that Jesus used the term as a messianic title for himself, so that he could speak modestly about his person and mission yet convey the exalted content he wished to reveal about himself. He could do this with considerable originality because the term was not fraught with popular misconceptions concerning the Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>The term occurs only four other times in the NT. In Acts 7:56, Stephen says, “Look, I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing in the place of honor at God’s right hand!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Hebrews 2:6 quotes Psalm 8:4 as applying to Jesus. Finally, Revelation 1:13 and 14:14 record visions of someone “like a son of man,” who is undoubtedly the glorified Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels, the first theme in Jesus’ self-revelation connected with his use of the title “Son of Man” concerns his coming to earth to accomplish his messianic mission. A general comparison of Jesus’ present earthly condition with that of his previous heavenly glory is expressed in the saying “Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head” (Mt 8:20; see Lk 9:58). This saying indicates that the Son of Man gave up his heavenly home to suffer all the humiliations of his earthly ministry (Phil 2:5-11).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used the title to claim divine prerogatives, saying, “The Son of Man is Lord of the sabbath” (Mt 12:8; Mk 2:28; Lk 6:5). The Sabbath, a divine institution, may not be revised by ordinary men. But since Jesus is the Son of Man from heaven, he is free to rule as Lord even of the Sabbath, because he is the same Lord who instituted the Sabbath (Gn 2:2; Ex 20:8-11). After healing the paralytic at Capernaum, Jesus claimed that “the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins” (Mt 9:6; Mk 2:10; Lk 5:24). Previously, forgiveness of sins came from heaven and from God, but now forgiveness comes from Capernaum and is given by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The second aspect of Jesus’ use of the “Son of Man” title concerns his suffering, death, and glorious resurrection as the mysterious method he would use to fulfill his earthly mission as the Son of Man. Jesus began expounding this passion theme after Peter confessed him to be Messiah and Son of God (Mt 16:16). Jesus’ prediction of his passion as the Son of Man begins in Mark 8:31-32 and is repeated in several other texts. The Gospels expand the theme to include his suffering of mockery and scourging (Mt 17:12; 20:18; Mk 8:31; Lk 9:22), betrayal by Judas (Mt 17:22; 26:24-25; Mk 14:21, 41), rejection by the Jewish leaders (Mt 20:18), death by crucifixion (Mt 20:19; Mk 9:12, 31; 10:33), burial for three days (Mt 12:40; Lk 11:30), and resurrection (Mt 17:22-23; Mk 8:31).<\/p>\n<p>In the famous text “The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45), Jesus teaches that his death was a vicarious sacrifice for the salvation of his people. This idea of substitutionary atonement is a new element in the Son of Man material and derives from Jesus’ understanding of himself as the suffering Servant of the Lord (Is 53).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus also used the “Son of Man” title to teach about his second coming. As the Son of Man, Jesus will return to earth from heaven in the glory of his Father with the angels (Mt 16:27; Mk 8:38; Lk 9:26). First, he will be seated at the right hand of God, and then he will come again (Mt 26:64; Mk 14:62; Lk 22:69) with the clouds (Mt 24:30; Mk 13:26; Lk 21:27). This coming will be unexpected (Mt 24:27; Lk 12:40), like a flash of lightning or the flood of Noah (Mt 24:37; Lk 17:24). His coming will be for the gathering of the elect, the judgment of all the nations of the earth (Mt 19:28; 25:32), and the restoration of final righteousness in the world (19:28; 25:46).<\/p>\n<p>In these passages, Jesus’ focus shifts from the provisional victory in his passion and resurrection to the final victory of the Son of Man at his second coming. Here again, the dramatic emphasis is on the heavenly origin and divine prerogatives of the Son of Man. This man Jesus, the Son of Man, will be the final judge (cf. Acts 17:31).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John has its own distinctive material concerning the Son of Man. The angels are said to ascend and descend on the Son of Man (Jn 1:51), thereby signifying that he is a preexistent person who has come from heaven to earth (3:13; 6:62). His being lifted up (by crucifixion) will bring about eternal life for all who believe in him (3:14). The Son of Man (3:14) is also the Son of God (3:16), God’s one and only Son (1:18; 3:18). Quite simply, in John’s Gospel, the “Son of Man” title is equivalent to the title “Son of God.” It reveals his divinity, preexistence, heavenly origin, and divine prerogatives. It affirms his present earthly condition for revelation and passion, and his future eschatological glory. The Father has given the Son of Man authority to raise the dead and to judge the world (5:25-27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Teachings of; Messiah; Son of God.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SON OF MAN<\/h3>\n<p>Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory.<\/p>\n<p>The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. The book of Ezekiel is the general source, since this prophet was referred to as “son of man” 90 times. For example, God addressed him, “Son of man, stand upon your feet, and I will speak with you” (Ez 2:1, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus’ use of the term “Son of Man” and numerous themes from Ezekiel suggest his desire to identify himself as the eschatological prophet who, like Ezekiel (chs 4, 7, 10, 22, 40–48), had the last word about the destruction of Jerusalem and the restoration of the kingdom of God to Israel (Mt 23–24; Acts 1:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>The specific source of the term is Daniel 7:13-14, with its vision of one “like a son of man” who “comes with the clouds” into the presence of “the Ancient of Days,” who gives him the universal and eternal kingdom of God. Jesus repeatedly quoted parts of this text in teaching about his second coming (Mt 16:27; 19:28; 24:30; 25:31; 26:64). Clearly, Jesus understood this passage as a prophetic portrayal of his own person: his incarnation, ascension, and inheritance of the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the term “Son of Man” is used by Jesus about 80 times as a mysterious, indirect way of speaking about himself (Mt, 32 times; Mk, 14 times; Lk, 26 times; Jn, 10 times). In all these texts, Jesus was always the speaker, and no one ever addressed him as “Son of Man.” In some texts the reference is cryptic enough for some interpreters to insist that Jesus was speaking about another person. Such uncertainty is recorded in only one text in John, where the crowd asks Jesus, “Who is this ‘Son of Man’?” (Jn 12:34). In most texts, the identification is clear. In some it is explicit: “Who do men say that the Son of Man is?”—followed by, “Who do you say that I am?” (Mt 16:13, 15). The conclusion generally drawn is that Jesus used the term as a messianic title for himself, so that he could speak modestly about his person and mission yet convey the exalted content he wished to reveal about himself. He could do this with considerable originality because the term was not fraught with popular misconceptions concerning the Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>The term occurs only four other times in the NT. In Acts 7:56, Stephen says, “Look, I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing in the place of honor at God’s right hand!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Hebrews 2:6 quotes Psalm 8:4 as applying to Jesus. Finally, Revelation 1:13 and 14:14 record visions of someone “like a son of man,” who is undoubtedly the glorified Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels, the first theme in Jesus’ self-revelation connected with his use of the title “Son of Man” concerns his coming to earth to accomplish his messianic mission. A general comparison of Jesus’ present earthly condition with that of his previous heavenly glory is expressed in the saying “Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head” (Mt 8:20; see Lk 9:58). This saying indicates that the Son of Man gave up his heavenly home to suffer all the humiliations of his earthly ministry (Phil 2:5-11).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used the title to claim divine prerogatives, saying, “The Son of Man is Lord of the sabbath” (Mt 12:8; Mk 2:28; Lk 6:5). The Sabbath, a divine institution, may not be revised by ordinary men. But since Jesus is the Son of Man from heaven, he is free to rule as Lord even of the Sabbath, because he is the same Lord who instituted the Sabbath (Gn 2:2; Ex 20:8-11). After healing the paralytic at Capernaum, Jesus claimed that “the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins” (Mt 9:6; Mk 2:10; Lk 5:24). Previously, forgiveness of sins came from heaven and from God, but now forgiveness comes from Capernaum and is given by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The second aspect of Jesus’ use of the “Son of Man” title concerns his suffering, death, and glorious resurrection as the mysterious method he would use to fulfill his earthly mission as the Son of Man. Jesus began expounding this passion theme after Peter confessed him to be Messiah and Son of God (Mt 16:16). Jesus’ prediction of his passion as the Son of Man begins in Mark 8:31-32 and is repeated in several other texts. The Gospels expand the theme to include his suffering of mockery and scourging (Mt 17:12; 20:18; Mk 8:31; Lk 9:22), betrayal by Judas (Mt 17:22; 26:24-25; Mk 14:21, 41), rejection by the Jewish leaders (Mt 20:18), death by crucifixion (Mt 20:19; Mk 9:12, 31; 10:33), burial for three days (Mt 12:40; Lk 11:30), and resurrection (Mt 17:22-23; Mk 8:31).<\/p>\n<p>In the famous text “The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45), Jesus teaches that his death was a vicarious sacrifice for the salvation of his people. This idea of substitutionary atonement is a new element in the Son of Man material and derives from Jesus’ understanding of himself as the suffering Servant of the Lord (Is 53).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus also used the “Son of Man” title to teach about his second coming. As the Son of Man, Jesus will return to earth from heaven in the glory of his Father with the angels (Mt 16:27; Mk 8:38; Lk 9:26). First, he will be seated at the right hand of God, and then he will come again (Mt 26:64; Mk 14:62; Lk 22:69) with the clouds (Mt 24:30; Mk 13:26; Lk 21:27). This coming will be unexpected (Mt 24:27; Lk 12:40), like a flash of lightning or the flood of Noah (Mt 24:37; Lk 17:24). His coming will be for the gathering of the elect, the judgment of all the nations of the earth (Mt 19:28; 25:32), and the restoration of final righteousness in the world (19:28; 25:46).<\/p>\n<p>In these passages, Jesus’ focus shifts from the provisional victory in his passion and resurrection to the final victory of the Son of Man at his second coming. Here again, the dramatic emphasis is on the heavenly origin and divine prerogatives of the Son of Man. This man Jesus, the Son of Man, will be the final judge (cf. Acts 17:31).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John has its own distinctive material concerning the Son of Man. The angels are said to ascend and descend on the Son of Man (Jn 1:51), thereby signifying that he is a preexistent person who has come from heaven to earth (3:13; 6:62). His being lifted up (by crucifixion) will bring about eternal life for all who believe in him (3:14). The Son of Man (3:14) is also the Son of God (3:16), God’s one and only Son (1:18; 3:18). Quite simply, in John’s Gospel, the “Son of Man” title is equivalent to the title “Son of God.” It reveals his divinity, preexistence, heavenly origin, and divine prerogatives. It affirms his present earthly condition for revelation and passion, and his future eschatological glory. The Father has given the Son of Man authority to raise the dead and to judge the world (5:25-27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Teachings of; Messiah; Son of God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SON OF MAN Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory. The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. ...","summary_en":"SON OF MAN Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory. The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. ...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56338,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:51","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:51","content_ro":"<p><strong>1:51<\/strong> <em>I tell you the truth<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">amēn amēn<\/span>): Jesus often used this expression to emphasize what he was about to say. In John’s Gospel, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">amēn<\/span> is always doubled. • <span class=\"ital\"\/><em>you will all see heaven open:<\/em> Jesus made the comparison with Jacob explicit (see study note on 1:47; see Gen 28:10-22). Like Jacob, Nathanael would see God at work. Jesus himself is the new Bethel (“house of God,” Gen 28:19), the place where God lives. • <em>Son of Man:<\/em> See study note on John 9:35; see also Dan 7:13-14; Mark 8:31. • John the apostle used several names for Jesus (Son of God, Son of Man, Messiah). Knowing Jesus’ true identity is necessary to fully understanding and following him.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>1:51<\/strong> <em>I tell you the truth<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">amēn amēn<\/span>): Jesus often used this expression to emphasize what he was about to say. In John’s Gospel, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">amēn<\/span> is always doubled. • <span class=\"ital\"\/><em>you will all see heaven open:<\/em> Jesus made the comparison with Jacob explicit (see study note on 1:47; see Gen 28:10-22). Like Jacob, Nathanael would see God at work. Jesus himself is the new Bethel (“house of God,” Gen 28:19), the place where God lives. • <em>Son of Man:<\/em> See study note on John 9:35; see also Dan 7:13-14; Mark 8:31. • John the apostle used several names for Jesus (Son of God, Son of Man, Messiah). Knowing Jesus’ true identity is necessary to fully understanding and following him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:51 I tell you the truth (Greek amēn amēn): Jesus often used this expression to emphasize what he was about to say. In John’s Gospel, the Greek word amēn is always doubled. • you will all see heaven open: Jesus made the comparison with Jacob explicit (see study note on 1:47; see Gen 28:10-22). Like Jacob, Nathanael would see God at work. Jesus himself is the new Bethel (“house of God,” Gen 28:19), the place where God lives. • Son of Man: See study note on John 9:35; see also Dan 7:13-14; Mar...","summary_en":"1:51 I tell you the truth (Greek amēn amēn): Jesus often used this expression to emphasize what he was about to say. In John’s Gospel, the Greek word amēn is always doubled. • you will all see heaven open: Jesus made the comparison with Jacob explicit (see study note on 1:47; see Gen 28:10-22). Like Jacob, Nathanael would see God at work. Jesus himself is the new Bethel (“house of God,” Gen 28:19), the place where God lives. • Son of Man: See study note on John 9:35; see also Dan 7:13-14; Mar...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":83964,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:51","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:51","content_ro":"<p><strong>1:51<\/strong> <em>I tell you the truth<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">amēn amēn<\/span>): Jesus often used this expression to emphasize what he was about to say. In John’s Gospel, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">amēn<\/span> is always doubled. • <span class=\"ital\"\/><em>you will all see heaven open:<\/em> Jesus made the comparison with Jacob explicit (see study note on 1:47; see Gen 28:10-22). Like Jacob, Nathanael would see God at work. Jesus himself is the new Bethel (“house of God,” Gen 28:19), the place where God lives. • <em>Son of Man:<\/em> See study note on John 9:35; see also Dan 7:13-14; Mark 8:31. • John the apostle used several names for Jesus (Son of God, Son of Man, Messiah). Knowing Jesus’ true identity is necessary to fully understanding and following him.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>1:51<\/strong> <em>I tell you the truth<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">amēn amēn<\/span>): Jesus often used this expression to emphasize what he was about to say. In John’s Gospel, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">amēn<\/span> is always doubled. • <span class=\"ital\"\/><em>you will all see heaven open:<\/em> Jesus made the comparison with Jacob explicit (see study note on 1:47; see Gen 28:10-22). Like Jacob, Nathanael would see God at work. Jesus himself is the new Bethel (“house of God,” Gen 28:19), the place where God lives. • <em>Son of Man:<\/em> See study note on John 9:35; see also Dan 7:13-14; Mark 8:31. • John the apostle used several names for Jesus (Son of God, Son of Man, Messiah). Knowing Jesus’ true identity is necessary to fully understanding and following him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:51 I tell you the truth (Greek amēn amēn): Jesus often used this expression to emphasize what he was about to say. In John’s Gospel, the Greek word amēn is always doubled. • you will all see heaven open: Jesus made the comparison with Jacob explicit (see study note on 1:47; see Gen 28:10-22). Like Jacob, Nathanael would see God at work. Jesus himself is the new Bethel (“house of God,” Gen 28:19), the place where God lives. • Son of Man: See study note on John 9:35; see also Dan 7:13-14; Mar...","summary_en":"1:51 I tell you the truth (Greek amēn amēn): Jesus often used this expression to emphasize what he was about to say. In John’s Gospel, the Greek word amēn is always doubled. • you will all see heaven open: Jesus made the comparison with Jacob explicit (see study note on 1:47; see Gen 28:10-22). Like Jacob, Nathanael would see God at work. Jesus himself is the new Bethel (“house of God,” Gen 28:19), the place where God lives. • Son of Man: See study note on John 9:35; see also Dan 7:13-14; Mar...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111590,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:51","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:51","content_ro":"<p><strong>1:51<\/strong> <em>I tell you the truth<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">amēn amēn<\/span>): Jesus often used this expression to emphasize what he was about to say. In John’s Gospel, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">amēn<\/span> is always doubled. • <span class=\"ital\"\/><em>you will all see heaven open:<\/em> Jesus made the comparison with Jacob explicit (see study note on 1:47; see Gen 28:10-22). Like Jacob, Nathanael would see God at work. Jesus himself is the new Bethel (“house of God,” Gen 28:19), the place where God lives. • <em>Son of Man:<\/em> See study note on John 9:35; see also Dan 7:13-14; Mark 8:31. • John the apostle used several names for Jesus (Son of God, Son of Man, Messiah). Knowing Jesus’ true identity is necessary to fully understanding and following him.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>1:51<\/strong> <em>I tell you the truth<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">amēn amēn<\/span>): Jesus often used this expression to emphasize what he was about to say. In John’s Gospel, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">amēn<\/span> is always doubled. • <span class=\"ital\"\/><em>you will all see heaven open:<\/em> Jesus made the comparison with Jacob explicit (see study note on 1:47; see Gen 28:10-22). Like Jacob, Nathanael would see God at work. Jesus himself is the new Bethel (“house of God,” Gen 28:19), the place where God lives. • <em>Son of Man:<\/em> See study note on John 9:35; see also Dan 7:13-14; Mark 8:31. • John the apostle used several names for Jesus (Son of God, Son of Man, Messiah). Knowing Jesus’ true identity is necessary to fully understanding and following him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:51 I tell you the truth (Greek amēn amēn): Jesus often used this expression to emphasize what he was about to say. In John’s Gospel, the Greek word amēn is always doubled. • you will all see heaven open: Jesus made the comparison with Jacob explicit (see study note on 1:47; see Gen 28:10-22). Like Jacob, Nathanael would see God at work. Jesus himself is the new Bethel (“house of God,” Gen 28:19), the place where God lives. • Son of Man: See study note on John 9:35; see also Dan 7:13-14; Mar...","summary_en":"1:51 I tell you the truth (Greek amēn amēn): Jesus often used this expression to emphasize what he was about to say. In John’s Gospel, the Greek word amēn is always doubled. • you will all see heaven open: Jesus made the comparison with Jacob explicit (see study note on 1:47; see Gen 28:10-22). Like Jacob, Nathanael would see God at work. Jesus himself is the new Bethel (“house of God,” Gen 28:19), the place where God lives. • Son of Man: See study note on John 9:35; see also Dan 7:13-14; Mar...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139216,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 1:51","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 1:51","content_ro":"<p><strong>1:51<\/strong> <em>I tell you the truth<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">amēn amēn<\/span>): Jesus often used this expression to emphasize what he was about to say. In John’s Gospel, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">amēn<\/span> is always doubled. • <span class=\"ital\"\/><em>you will all see heaven open:<\/em> Jesus made the comparison with Jacob explicit (see study note on 1:47; see Gen 28:10-22). Like Jacob, Nathanael would see God at work. Jesus himself is the new Bethel (“house of God,” Gen 28:19), the place where God lives. • <em>Son of Man:<\/em> See study note on John 9:35; see also Dan 7:13-14; Mark 8:31. • John the apostle used several names for Jesus (Son of God, Son of Man, Messiah). Knowing Jesus’ true identity is necessary to fully understanding and following him.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>1:51<\/strong> <em>I tell you the truth<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">amēn amēn<\/span>): Jesus often used this expression to emphasize what he was about to say. In John’s Gospel, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">amēn<\/span> is always doubled. • <span class=\"ital\"\/><em>you will all see heaven open:<\/em> Jesus made the comparison with Jacob explicit (see study note on 1:47; see Gen 28:10-22). Like Jacob, Nathanael would see God at work. Jesus himself is the new Bethel (“house of God,” Gen 28:19), the place where God lives. • <em>Son of Man:<\/em> See study note on John 9:35; see also Dan 7:13-14; Mark 8:31. • John the apostle used several names for Jesus (Son of God, Son of Man, Messiah). Knowing Jesus’ true identity is necessary to fully understanding and following him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"1:51 I tell you the truth (Greek amēn amēn): Jesus often used this expression to emphasize what he was about to say. In John’s Gospel, the Greek word amēn is always doubled. • you will all see heaven open: Jesus made the comparison with Jacob explicit (see study note on 1:47; see Gen 28:10-22). Like Jacob, Nathanael would see God at work. Jesus himself is the new Bethel (“house of God,” Gen 28:19), the place where God lives. • Son of Man: See study note on John 9:35; see also Dan 7:13-14; Mar...","summary_en":"1:51 I tell you the truth (Greek amēn amēn): Jesus often used this expression to emphasize what he was about to say. In John’s Gospel, the Greek word amēn is always doubled. • you will all see heaven open: Jesus made the comparison with Jacob explicit (see study note on 1:47; see Gen 28:10-22). Like Jacob, Nathanael would see God at work. Jesus himself is the new Bethel (“house of God,” Gen 28:19), the place where God lives. • Son of Man: See study note on John 9:35; see also Dan 7:13-14; Mar...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64983,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of Man","title_en":"The Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","summary_en":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92609,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of Man","title_en":"The Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","summary_en":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120235,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of Man","title_en":"The Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","summary_en":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147861,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of Man","title_en":"The Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","summary_en":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}]},"labels":{"article":"Articol","map":"Hartă","chart":"Diagramă","textbox":"Notă explicativă","picture":"Imagine","profile":"Profil","study_note":"Notă de studiu","theme_note":"Temă biblică"},"icons":{"article":"📖","map":"🗺️","chart":"📊","textbox":"💡","picture":"🖼️","profile":"👤","study_note":"📝","theme_note":"🎯"},"typeColors":{"article":"#d4af37","map":"#2d7d46","chart":"#3b82f6","textbox":"#8b5cf6","picture":"#ec4899","profile":"#f59e0b","study_note":"#06b6d4","theme_note":"#ef4444"}}
🔍
Niciun rezultat
Nu am găsit versete care să conțină textul căutat.
Ioan 1
📘 Info carte
Se încarcă...
📖 Resurse
Muzică de relaxareSelectează o piesă
0:00
Redare audio
0 piese
🍪 Folosim cookie-uri
Folosim cookie-uri esențiale pentru funcționarea platformei și cookie-uri de analiză pentru a îmbunătăți experiența ta.
Află mai multe
✝️
Logosasistentul Biserica Online
✝️
Bine ai venit! 👋
Sunt Logos, prietenul tău spiritual. Începe conversația — te ascult cu drag! ✨